Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court. The bill would require a ward, in cases when he or she is not represented by counsel appointed in a dependency proceeding, to be given the opportunity to confer with counsel appointed in the wardship proceeding or by counsel retained to represent the ward in the wardship proceeding.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would require the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, then the reason that the consultation did not occur.

By imposing additional duties on local entities under these circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court. The bill would require a ward, in cases when he or she is not represented by counsel appointed in a dependency proceeding, to be given the opportunity to confer with counsel appointed in the wardship proceeding or by counsel retained to represent the ward in the wardship proceeding.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would require the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, then the reason that the consultation did not occur.

By imposing additional duties on local entities under these circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court. The bill would require a ward, in cases when he or she is not represented by counsel appointed in a dependency proceeding, to be given the opportunity to confer with counsel appointed in the wardship proceeding or by counsel retained to represent the ward in the wardship proceeding.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would require the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, then the reason that the consultation did not occur.

By imposing additional duties on local entities under these circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. By imposing additional duties on local entities under those circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would require the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, then the reason that the consultation did not occur.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. By imposing additional duties on local entities under those circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. By imposing additional duties on local entities under those circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the juvenile court.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would extend the application of those services and requirements in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be a ward of the court. By imposing additional duties on local entities under those circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would also grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent. parent or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child.

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge a child to be a dependent of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law authorizes a social worker to commence proceedings in the juvenile court to declare a child to be a dependent child of the court by the filing of a petition with the court. In any case in which a social worker, after investigation of an application for petition or other investigation, determines that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within the jurisdiction, existing law authorizes the social worker, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition already filed, and with the consent of the childs parent or guardian, to undertake a program of supervision of the child. If the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, existing law prohibits the program of supervision from being undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

This bill would make this prohibition applicable to a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court.

Existing law, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged to be dependent children of the juvenile court, authorizes family reunification services to be provided to the family of the dependent child under circumstances in which ordinarily those services would be denied and requires a party seeking an involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child born to a parent or parents who were minors at the time of the childs birth to demonstrate to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal from the minor parent or parents, and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.

This bill would grant a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent the right to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1371

Author:(Mark Stone and Maienschein)

As Amended Ver:September 7, 2017

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: JUD.

SUMMARY: Expands the opportunity for youth in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems who are also parents to consult with an attorney before their children are removed from their care and better protects the ability of these parents to raise their children. Specifically, this bill:

1. Expands, to include parents who are wards or nonminor dependents, in addition to minor dependents, the requirement that if counsel has been appointed for that parent, a social worker may not undertake a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, for the child until that parent has consulted with counsel. If a ward is not represented by counsel in a dependency proceeding, requires the ward to be given the opportunity to consult with his or her counsel in the warship proceeding.
2. Eliminates, where one or both minor parent are wards, the provision that reunification services need not be provided in instances where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over any siblings or half siblings, as specified, unless other specified circumstances eliminating the need for reunification services also exist.
3. Requires, where one or both minor parent are wards, a party seeking foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful.
4. Requires that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer: a) arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent; or b) recommending a non-parent seek legal guardianship. Requires the social worker or probation officer to note in the file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

The Senate amendments add the requirement that the social worker or probation officer note whether the youth consulted with legal counsel, or if not, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Allows a juvenile court to adjudicate a child a dependent of the court as the result of abuse or neglect, as specified. (Welfare & Institutions Code Section 300. Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to that code.)
2. Provides that a juvenile court has jurisdiction over a child when that child has committed acts that trigger delinquency jurisdiction rendering the child a ward. (Sections 601 and 602.)
3. Defines a "nonminor dependent" as a current or former foster youth who is between 18 and 21 years old, in foster care under the responsibility of the county welfare department, county probation department, or Indian Tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (Section 11400(v).)
4. Requires the court to appoint counsel for an unrepresented child in a dependency case, unless the court finds that the child would not benefit from the appointment of counsel. (Section 317(c).)
5. Allows a social worker, after a determination that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within that jurisdiction, and with the consent of the parent, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition, to undertake a program of supervision. If the program of supervision is undertaken, the social worker shall arrange for appropriate child welfare services within the time periods specified. (Section 301.)
6. Provides that, if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, a social worker may not undertake a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, until that parent has consulted with counsel. (Id.)
7. Eliminates the provision that reunification services need not be provided, for a child for whom one or both minor parents were adjudged to be dependents of the juvenile court, where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over any siblings or half siblings, as specified, unless other specified circumstances removing the necessity for reunification services also exist. (Section 361.8(b).)
8. Requires a party seeking foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child where one or both parents are dependents of the juvenile court to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful. (Id.)

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. Minor costs of less than $2,000 ($1,600 GF) per year for increased probation officer time to inform wards in their care of the right and requirement of speaking with their attorney prior to engaging in voluntary family reunification or family maintenance child welfare services for their own minor child. This assumes a caseload of at least 98 cases annually.
2. Unknown potentially significant local assistance costs for the provision of remedial services to minor wards who are parents. This includes parenting classes, home visiting services, mental health/counseling services (postpartum depression treatment as well), housing assistance, drug or alcohol abuse treatment services, legal advice, and assisting the minor ward parent with permanency planning, as appropriate.

COMMENTS: The first goal of the foster care system is to keep or reunify children with their parents, provided it can be done safely. That goal is no different if the parents themselves are already part of the system, whether as foster youth, wards of the juvenile court, or nonminor dependents. Unfortunately, these young parents face formidable odds to keep their families together. In 2008 and again in 2013, the Legislature gave foster youth who are parents a fighting chance to raise their children by requiring that they consult with an attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision for their children, and by providing both increased efforts before their children can be removed from their care and additional reunification chances. (AB 260 (Lopez), Chapter 511, Statutes of 2015; AB 2483 (Bass), Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008) This bill expands on these important protections for young parents in several key ways. First, it would extend the requirement that foster children who are parents consult with their attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision to include parents who are wards and nonminor dependents. Second, it would require that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult his or her attorney before a social worker or probation officer does either of the following: a) arranges any custody agreement that includes a voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent; or b) recommends a non-parent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would also provide wards, in more instances, with reunification services. Finally, the bill would require that reasonable efforts be made to provide wards with services and that such efforts be unsuccessful before their children can be removed in the first place.

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0002165

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1371

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/27/17

AYES: Wiener, Berryhill, Glazer, Newman, Nguyen

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/11/17

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Monning, Stern, Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 9/1/17

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Bradford, Hill, Nielsen, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/26/17 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Children’s Law Center of California

Youth Law Center

DIGEST:

This bill affirms and expands the rights of minors, nonminor dependents and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/7/17 clarify the requirement that a ward, in cases when he or she is not represented by counsel appointed in a dependency proceeding, must be given the opportunity to confer with counsel appointed or retained to represent the ward in the wardship proceeding prior to their children being removed.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the jurisdiction of the dependency court over children who have suffered or are at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm inflicted non accidentally upon the child by the child’s parent or guardian or as a the result of the failure or inability of his or her parent or guardian to provide adequate supervision.
2. Requires the court to make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a minor from his or her home, as specified.
3. Establishes circumstances under which family reunification services should be ordered to be provided for families and stipulates instances when, upon the court finding clear and convincing evidence, reunification services need not be supplied to a parent or guardian, as specified.
4. Permits a social worker to undertake a program of supervision of the child in lieu of filing a petition to remove the child, as specified. Requires that if a program of supervision is undertaken, the social worker shall attempt to ameliorate the situation which brings the child within, or creates the probability that the child will be within, the jurisdiction of the dependency court by providing or arranging to contract for all appropriate child welfare services within specified time limits.
5. Prohibits a program of supervision from being undertaken if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and has appointed counsel until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. The program of supervision includes a voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance program.
6. Makes a Legislative declaration that a child of a minor or nonminor dependent parent shall not be considered to be at risk of abuse or neglect solely based on information concerning the parent’s or parents’ placement history, past behaviors, or health or mental health diagnoses occurring prior to the pregnancy. Permits that information to be considered in evaluating whether other factors exist that place the child at risk of abuse or neglect.
7. Prohibits removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful. Further requires efforts be made to utilize resources of the parents’ extended family, social services agencies, caregivers and other service providers.
8. Authorizes a court to deny reunification services to a parent under certain circumstances, including that parental rights have been terminated for a sibling of the child with the same parent, that a parent is a registered sex offender, has abandoned the child, and other factors. However, requires a court not to consider termination of parental rights for a sibling, unless other factors are present, if the parent is a foster child.

This bill:

1. Expands the social worker’s requirement to have a foster child consult with legal counsel prior to authorizing voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance or similar programs, to additionally require the same consultation for a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the delinquency court.
2. Requires a ward who is not represented by counsel appointed in a dependency proceeding to be given the opportunity to confer with counsel appointed in the wardship proceeding, as specified, or by counsel retained to represent the ward in the wardship proceeding.
3. Expands the prohibition of removal unless a social worker can demonstrate reasonable efforts were made to provide services to a parent who is a foster child to also include the requirement in cases where the parent is a ward of the delinquency court.
4. Expands the list of crimes that trigger the inclusion of consideration that a parent’s rights have been terminated or severed to include that a parent knowingly participated in the sexual exploitation of a child, as specified.
5. Requires that a parent be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consent with her or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent, or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, except as already provided in state law.
6. Requires the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

Background

Approximately 61,400 California children were in out-of-home foster care placement through the child welfare system as of October 1, 2016. The state’s child welfare system is intended to protect children who have been or are at risk of being abused, neglected or exploited by providing intensive services to families in order to keep them together. If a court determines maintaining the family is not in the best interest of the child, the child is removed and the child welfare agency arranges for and monitors placement in the safest and least restrictive environment.

Outcomes for foster children are poor: Children and youth have increased rates of chronic health conditions, low educational achievement, mental illness, developmental disabilities, and high rates of unintended pregnancy. Approximately one-third of the children in foster care are adolescents of reproductive age, and researchers have correlated being in foster care with younger age at first intercourse, greater number of sexual partners, and teen pregnancy.

Pregnancy Among Foster Youth

A longitudinal study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall on California adolescents in foster care found half of the 19 year olds surveyed reported ever being pregnant, and documented other heightened pregnancy risks among teens in foster care:

Researchers at Chapin Hall also found that two-thirds of young foster women who were pregnant by age 19 described their pregnancy as unintended. More than 34 percent of foster youth who were sexually active reported using no contraception in the prior 12 months, as compared to 15 percent of the same aged population of youth who were not in foster care.

Parenting foster youth

According to CDSS, there were 1,014 parenting youth in the foster care system in 2015, the most recent year with complete date. Those parents had 1,193 children. Of that number, 105 children – or 9 percent of the total – were subject to child welfare petitions, as identified in the chart below.

Researchers at the Children’s Data Network at the University of Southern California (USC) and the UC Berkeley Child Welfare Indicators Project published a report in 2013 that identified high rates of parenting among foster youth. The authors wrote that “tracking births that occur over time provides a more complete picture of the number youth who are parenting during their teens. Among girls in foster care at age 17, more than 25% had given birth at least once before age 20.” Repeat teen births are not uncommon. Among girls in foster care who first gave birth before age 18, nearly 40 percent went on to have a second teen birth.

Additionally, researchers at USC found a correlation between parenting foster youth and reports of abuse or neglect about their own children. Specifically, 15.8 percent of the children of teen mothers who were not reported to child protective services as victims of maltreatment became the subject of CPS reports by age 5. “In contrast, the corresponding rates of children reported among those born to a mother with an unsubstantiated or substantiated report (of maltreatment) were 30.7 percent and 39.8 percent.” The number of children whose reports resulted in open child welfare cases was smaller.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2483 (Bass, Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008) requires that if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision shall not take place until the minor parent has consulted with Counsel.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, minor costs of less than $2,000 ($1,600 GF) per year for increased probation officer time to inform wards in their care of the right and requirement of speaking with their attorney prior to engaging in voluntary family reunification or family maintenance child welfare services for their own minor child. This assumes a caseload of at least 98 cases annually.

Unknown potentially significant local assistance costs for the provision of remedial services to minor wards who are parents. This includes parenting classes, home visiting services, mental health/counseling services (postpartum depression treatment as well), housing assistance, drug or alcohol abuse treatment services, legal advice, and assisting the minor ward parent with permanency planning, as appropriate.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/1/17)

Children’s Law Center of California (co-source)

Youth Law Center (co-source)

Children Now

National Association of Social Workers

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/1/17)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/26/17

AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Cervantes, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gomez, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Chau, Eggman, Steinorth, Waldron

Prepared by:

9/9/17 15:15:09

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1371

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE: 5-0, 6/27/17

AYES: Wiener, Berryhill, Glazer, Newman, Nguyen

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/11/17

AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Anderson, Hertzberg, Monning, Stern, Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 9/1/17

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Bradford, Hill, Nielsen, Wiener

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/26/17 (Consent) - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Children’s Law Center of California

Youth Law Center

DIGEST:

This bill affirms and expands the rights of minors, nonminor dependents and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the jurisdiction of the dependency court over children who have suffered or are at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm inflicted non accidentally upon the child by the child’s parent or guardian or as a the result of the failure or inability of his or her parent or guardian to provide adequate supervision.
2. Requires the court to make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a minor from his or her home, as specified.
3. Establishes circumstances under which family reunification services should be ordered to be provided for families and stipulates instances when, upon the court finding clear and convincing evidence, reunification services need not be supplied to a parent or guardian, as specified.
4. Permits a social worker to undertake a program of supervision of the child in lieu of filing a petition to remove the child, as specified. Requires that if a program of supervision is undertaken, the social worker shall attempt to ameliorate the situation which brings the child within, or creates the probability that the child will be within, the jurisdiction of the dependency court by providing or arranging to contract for all appropriate child welfare services within specified time limits.
5. Prohibits a program of supervision from being undertaken if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and has appointed counsel until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. The program of supervision includes a voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance program.
6. Makes a Legislative declaration that a child of a minor or nonminor dependent parent shall not be considered to be at risk of abuse or neglect solely based on information concerning the parent’s or parents’ placement history, past behaviors, or health or mental health diagnoses occurring prior to the pregnancy. Permits that information to be considered in evaluating whether other factors exist that place the child at risk of abuse or neglect.
7. Prohibits removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful. Further requires efforts be made to utilize resources of the parents’ extended family, social services agencies, caregivers and other service providers.
8. Authorizes a court to deny reunification services to a parent under certain circumstances, including that parental rights have been terminated for a sibling of the child with the same parent, that a parent is a registered sex offender, has abandoned the child, and other factors. However, requires a court not to consider termination of parental rights for a sibling, unless other factors are present, if the parent is a foster child.

This bill:

1. Expands the social worker’s requirement to have a foster child consult with legal counsel prior to authorizing voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance or similar programs, to additionally require the same consultation for a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the delinquency court.
2. Expands the prohibition of removal unless a social worker can demonstrate reasonable efforts were made to provide services to a parent who is a foster child to also include the requirement in cases where the parent is a ward of the delinquency court.
3. Expands the list of crimes that trigger the inclusion of consideration that a parent’s rights have been terminated or severed to include that a parent knowingly participated in the sexual exploitation of a child, as specified.
4. Requires that a parent be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consent with her or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent, or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, except as already provided in state law.
5. Requires the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

Background

Approximately 61,400 California children were in out-of-home foster care placement through the child welfare system as of October 1, 2016. The state’s child welfare system is intended to protect children who have been or are at risk of being abused, neglected or exploited by providing intensive services to families in order to keep them together. If a court determines maintaining the family is not in the best interest of the child, the child is removed and the child welfare agency arranges for and monitors placement in the safest and least restrictive environment.

Outcomes for foster children are poor: Children and youth have increased rates of chronic health conditions, low educational achievement, mental illness, developmental disabilities, and high rates of unintended pregnancy. Approximately one-third of the children in foster care are adolescents of reproductive age, and researchers have correlated being in foster care with younger age at first intercourse, greater number of sexual partners, and teen pregnancy.

Pregnancy Among Foster Youth

A longitudinal study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall on California adolescents in foster care found half of the 19 year olds surveyed reported ever being pregnant, and documented other heightened pregnancy risks among teens in foster care:

Researchers at Chapin Hall also found that two-thirds of young foster women who were pregnant by age 19 described their pregnancy as unintended. More than 34 percent of foster youth who were sexually active reported using no contraception in the prior 12 months, as compared to 15 percent of the same aged population of youth who were not in foster care.

Parenting foster youth

According to CDSS, there were 1,014 parenting youth in the foster care system in 2015, the most recent year with complete date. Those parents had 1,193 children. Of that number, 105 children – or 9 percent of the total – were subject to child welfare petitions, as identified in the chart below.

Researchers at the Children’s Data Network at the University of Southern California (USC) and the UC Berkeley Child Welfare Indicators Project published a report in 2013 that identified high rates of parenting among foster youth. The authors wrote that “tracking births that occur over time provides a more complete picture of the number youth who are parenting during their teens. Among girls in foster care at age 17, more than 25% had given birth at least once before age 20.” Repeat teen births are not uncommon. Among girls in foster care who first gave birth before age 18, nearly 40 percent went on to have a second teen birth.

Additionally, researchers at USC found a correlation between parenting foster youth and reports of abuse or neglect about their own children. Specifically, 15.8 percent of the children of teen mothers who were not reported to child protective services as victims of maltreatment became the subject of CPS reports by age 5. “In contrast, the corresponding rates of children reported among those born to a mother with an unsubstantiated or substantiated report (of maltreatment) were 30.7 percent and 39.8 percent.” The number of children whose reports resulted in open child welfare cases was smaller.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2483 (Bass, Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008) requires that if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision shall not take place until the minor parent has consulted with Counsel.

SB 500 (Keuhl, Chapter 630, Statutes of 2005) established the Whole Family Home, established a second caregiver payment for the child of a foster youth, and created the requirement for a shared responsibility plan between the foster caregiver and the dependent parent.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, minor costs of less than $2,000 ($1,600 GF) per year for increased probation officer time to inform wards in their care of the right and requirement of speaking with their attorney prior to engaging in voluntary family reunification or family maintenance child welfare services for their own minor child. This assumes a caseload of at least 98 cases annually.

Unknown potentially significant local assistance costs for the provision of remedial services to minor wards who are parents. This includes parenting classes, home visiting services, mental health/counseling services (postpartum depression treatment as well), housing assistance, drug or alcohol abuse treatment services, legal advice, and assisting the minor ward parent with permanency planning, as appropriate.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/1/17)

Children’s Law Center of California (co-source)

Youth Law Center (co-source)

Children Now

National Association of Social Workers

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/1/17)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 76-0, 5/26/17

AYES: Acosta, Aguiar-Curry, Travis Allen, Arambula, Baker, Berman, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Brough, Burke, Caballero, Calderon, Cervantes, Chávez, Chen, Chiu, Choi, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Cunningham, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Flora, Fong, Frazier, Friedman, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Gloria, Gomez, Gonzalez Fletcher, Gray, Grayson, Harper, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Kiley, Lackey, Levine, Limón, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Patterson, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Rubio, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Voepel, Weber, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Chau, Eggman, Steinorth, Waldron

Prepared by:

9/3/17 18:12:38

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular Session

AB 1371 (Mark Stone) - Juveniles: ward, dependent, and nonminor dependent parents

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

AB 1371 would affirm and expand the rights of minor, nonminor dependents, and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

Fiscal Impact:

• Minor costs of less than $2,000 ($1,600 GF) per year for increased probation officer time to inform wards in their care of the right and requirement of speaking with their attorney prior to engaging in voluntary family reunification or family maintenance child welfare services for their own minor child. This assumes a caseload of at least 98 cases annually.
• Unknown potentially significant local assistance costs for the provision of remedial services to minor wards who are parents. This includes parenting classes, home visiting services, mental health/counseling services (postpartum depression treatment as well), housing assistance, drug or alcohol abuse treatment services, legal advice, and assisting the minor ward parent with permanency planning, as appropriate.

Background:

According to CDSS, in 2015, there were 1,014 parenting youth in the foster care system having 1,193 children. Of that number, 105 children (9%) were subject to child welfare petitions. A 2013 report from the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation stated that among girls in foster care at age 17, more than 25% had given birth at least once before age 20, and that repeat teen births are not uncommon. Among girls in foster care who first gave birth before age 18, nearly 40% went on to have a second teen birth.

Outcomes for foster children are poor: Children and youth have increased rates of chronic health conditions, low educational achievement, mental illness, developmental disabilities, and high rates of unintended pregnancy. Researchers at USC found a correlation between parenting foster youth and reports of abuse or neglect with their own children. Specifically, 15.8% of the children of teen mothers who were not reported to child protective services as victims of maltreatment became the subject of CPS reports by age 5. The number of children who were the subject of child welfare cases is smaller. In contrast, the corresponding rates of children reported among those born to a mother with an unsubstantiated or substantiated report (of maltreatment) were 30.7% and 39.8%, respectively.

Proposed Law:

This bill would:

• Expand the social worker’s requirement to have a foster child consult with legal counsel prior to authorizing voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance or similar programs to additionally require the same consultation for a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the delinquency court;
• Expand the prohibition of removal from a parent who is a foster child unless a social worker can demonstrate reasonable efforts were made to provide services to also include the same requirement in cases where the parent is a ward of the delinquency court;
• Require the social worker or probation officer to note in the case file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation did not occur.

Related Legislation:

AB 1838 (Ting, 2016) would have made a pregnant minor or nonminor dependent eligible for a foster care payment for their child during the last three months before the expected date of birth, as specified, subject to a verification of pregnancy. It was vetoed by the Governor.

AB 260 (Lopez, Chapter 511, Statutes of 2015) among other things, required that a foster care placement for dependent parents and their children support the preservation of the family unit and to prevent, whenever possible, the filing of a petition to declare the child a dependent of the juvenile court.

AB 2483 (Bass, Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008) requires that if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision shall not take place until the minor parent has consulted with counsel.

SB 500 (Keuhl, Chapter 630, Statutes of 2005) established the Whole Family Home, established a second caregiver payment for the child of a foster youth, and created the requirement for a shared responsibility plan between the foster caregiver and the dependent parent.

Staff Comments:

While there was an estimated 1,014 parenting youth in the foster care system in 2015 (and at least 845 parenting youth in 2016, though those data are not complete) these numbers only include probation wards in foster care. These data do not include probation wards that are not associated with child welfare, so the potential caseload could be larger.

-- END --

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2017-2018 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 1371 (Author:Mark Stone)

Version: June 29, 2017

Hearing Date: July 11, 2017

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: MS

SUBJECT

Juveniles: ward, dependent, and nonminor dependent parents

DESCRIPTION

This bill would affirm and expand the rights of minors, nonminor dependents, and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

BACKGROUND

Teenage girls in the dependency system are twice as likely to become pregnant before turning 19 than teenage girls who are not in foster care. The Guttmacher Institute argues that the circumstances that led these girls to be placed in foster care in the first place, along with the experience of being in foster care, seem to make them particularly vulnerable. (Boonstra, Heather D., Teen Pregnancy Among Young Women In Foster Care: A Primer, Spring 2011, Volume 14, Number 2.0, Guttmacher Policy Review.) Regarding the challenges that parenting foster youth face, the John Burton foundation recently noted:

Parenting foster youth fall into the double cross-hairs of foster care and teen parenthood. Educationally, they fall far behind their peers, with a rate of high school graduation 13 percent lower than non-parenting foster youth and 25 percent lower than their non-foster youth peers. As young, often single parents, two out of three will live at, or below the poverty line in adulthood. Most troubling, children of parenting foster youth are a full five times more likely to be maltreated and placed into foster care themselves. (Lemley, Amy; Moving Parenting Foster Youth Out of the Shadows, March 13, 2013, The John Burton Foundation.)

AB 12 (Beall and Bass, Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010), the California Fostering Connections to Success Act (Act), authorized the juvenile courts to exercise jurisdiction over and extend foster benefits to nonminor dependents between the ages of 18 to 21 if they meet specified criteria. Thus, eligible nonminor foster youth are now able to continue receiving support from the dependency system as they transition into adulthood. However, as California has expanded foster care to serve older youth, concerns related to reproductive health have become even more urgent. A 2009 Time article described why concerns are rising:

A study at the University of Chicago found that nearly half of girls who had spent time in the foster-care system had been pregnant at least once by the time they were 19 years old. Even more troubling, unplanned pregnancy had already become a pattern for many of the young women — close to one-quarter had experienced multiple pregnancies in their teens. …

The stats shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who knows the risk factors for teen pregnancy. A report released the week of July 20 by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy found that almost half of the 500,000 or so kids in foster care had sex for the first time before age 16, compared with 30 percent of their peers not in foster care. They're also more likely to have experienced forced sex and less likely to use contraception.

Perhaps the most important asset teenagers need to avoid early parenthood is a strong relationship with parents or other adults in their lives. But these are precisely the kinds of bonds that many foster teens lack. “You’re so busy being transferred from home to home,” says Alixes Rosado, who has been in foster care in Connecticut since he was 6 years old. “You don’t have a lot of stable connections.” The 20-year-old estimates that he has worked with a different social worker every year for the past 10. (Amy Sullivan, Teen Pregnancy: An Epidemic in Foster Care, July 22, 2009, Time <http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/ 0,8599,1911854,00.html> [as of July 3, 2017].)

The child welfare system seeks to ensure the safety and protection of these youths, and where possible, preserve and strengthen families through visitation and family reunification. Over the years, the Legislature has enacted a number of laws which require the court to take into consideration specific circumstances that present a barrier to family reunification when trying to create a permanency plan for a child. AB 2070 (Bass, Ch. 482, Stats. 2008) required courts to assess, among other factors, the particular barriers to accessing court-mandated services for institutionalized and incarcerated parents. Similarly, SB 977 (Liu, Ch. 219, Stats. 2014) required the court to consider whether a child can be returned to the custody of his or her parent in a certified substance abuse treatment facility.

AB 260 (Lopez, Ch. 511, Stats. 2015) reflected a recognizing of the challenges faced by parenting foster youth, and as such sought to ensure parenting foster youth were connected with available services so that they may safely retain the custody of their children. Including provisions that required:

• that foster care placements for dependent parents and their children support the preservation of the family unit and provide services, as specified, to prevent, whenever possible, the filing of a petition to declare a child a dependent of the juvenile court;
• exceptions to the provision that reunification services need not be ordered in instances where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over, any siblings or half siblings, as specified, unless other specified circumstances removing the necessity for reunification services also exist; and
• legislative findings and declarations that the child of a foster child is not considered at risk of abuse or neglect based solely on information regarding the parent’s placement history, past behaviors, or health or mental health diagnoses prior to the pregnancy, although such information may be taken into account when considering whether other factors exist that place the child at risk of abuse or neglect.

This bill would further build upon the efforts begun by AB 260 to ensure parenting foster youth have the supports and services needed to safely retain custody of their children. Specifically, this bill would:

• expand the social worker’s requirement to have a foster child consult with legal counsel prior to authorizing voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance or similar programs, to additionally require the same consultation for a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the delinquency court;
• expand the prohibition of removal from a parent who is a foster child unless a social worker can demonstrate reasonable efforts were made to provide services to also include the same requirement in cases where the parent is a ward of the delinquency court;
• expand the list of crimes that trigger the inclusion of consideration that a parent’s rights have been terminated or severed to include that a parent knowingly participated in the sexual exploitation of a child, as specified; and
• require that a parent who is a dependent or ward of the juvenile court be advised of the right, and have the opportunity to consult with, his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody. Establishes the same requirement prior to recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, as specified.

This bill was voted out of Senate Human Services Committee with a 5 to 0 vote.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the dependency court over children who have suffered or are at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm inflicted nonaccidentally upon the child by the child’s parent or guardian or as a result of the failure or inability of their parent or guardian to provide adequate supervision. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 300 et seq.)

Existing law provides that the court must make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a minor from their home. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.)

Existing law establishes circumstances under which family reunification services should be provided for families and stipulates instances when the court should order reunification services need not be supplied to a parent or guardian, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(b).)

Existing law provides that a social worker may undertake a program of supervision of the child in lieu of filing a petition to remove the child, as specified, as long as the social worker attempts to ameliorate the situation which brings the child into the jurisdiction of the dependency court by providing or arranging to contract for all appropriate child welfare services within specified time limits. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 301.)

Existing law provides that a program of supervision shall not be undertaken if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and has appointed counsel until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 301(c).)

Existing law provides that a program of supervision includes a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 301(c).)

Existing law makes a Legislative declaration that a child of a minor parent or nonminor dependent parent shall not be considered to be at risk of abuse or neglect solely on the basis of information concerning the parent’s or parents’ placement history, past behaviors, or health or mental health diagnoses occurring prior to the pregnancy, as specified. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.8(a).)

Existing law prohibits the removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless it can be demonstrated to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful. Additionally requires efforts be made to utilize resources of the parents’ extended family, social services agencies, caregivers and other service providers. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.8(b).)

Existing law provides that a court may deny reunification services to a parent under certain circumstances, including that parental rights have been terminated or permanently severed for a sibling of the child with the same parent, that a parent is a registered sex offender, has abandoned the child, and a number of other factors. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5.)

Existing law provides that a court must not consider termination of parental rights for a sibling, unless other factors are present if the parent is a foster child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Section 361.8.)

This bill would expand provisions of existing law relating to parenting dependents or nonminor dependents to minors adjudged to be wards of the court, as provided.

This bill would provide that prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court a dependent or nonminor dependent parent, or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, the parent shall be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consult with his or her legal counsel.

This bill would provide that the social worker or probation officer shall note in the case file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

This bill would expand the list of crimes that trigger the inclusion of consideration that a parent’s rights have been terminated or severed to include that a parent knowingly participated in the sexual exploitation of a child, as specified.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for this bill

According to the Author:

Young parents in foster care are especially at risk of losing temporary or even permanent custody of their children. California has worked hard to strengthen and protect these family units. While attorney consultation is required for a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, it is not required for other types of custody arrangements such as arranging a guardianship agreement with a relative. As a result, young foster parents are entering into custodial arrangements unwittingly and without a full understanding of the consequences. AB 1371 gives foster youth an opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to voluntarily limiting his or her custody. An attorney will be able to review the proposed agreement with the youth to ensure there is a full understanding of the agreement and its implications. This bill will protect a parenting youth’s rights and focus on the needs of the child, the parent, and the family as a unit.

1. Expanding existing provisions to wards of the juvenile court

Existing law provides that if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision based on a determination that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will soon be within that jurisdiction, and the parent has counsel appointed to them pursuant to their status as a dependent of the juvenile court, then the program of supervision shall not be undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 301.) Additionally, existing law prohibits the removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless it can be demonstrated to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful. Existing law also requires efforts be made to utilize resources of the parents’ extended family, social services agencies, caregivers and other service providers. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.8(b).)

This bill would expand these provisions to parents who are wards of the court pursuant to Welfare and Institution Code Sections 601 or 602. The goal of reunification is not dependent upon whether the parents are already a part of the dependency system, whether as foster youth, nonminor dependents, or wards of the juvenile court. AB 260 (Lopez, Ch. 511, Stats. 2015) recognized the formidable odds foster youth and nonminor dependents face when seeking to raise their children. In light of the difficulties those youth face, AB 260 provided for the prohibition of the removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless it can be demonstrated to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful, and provided the requirement that a dependent or nonminor dependent consult with their counsel prior to beginning a program of supervision. By expanding those provisions to include wards of the juvenile court, this bill recognizes the similar barriers faced by all parenting youth who are part of the dependency system, despite their method of entry into this system.

In support, the Youth Law Center, a co-sponsor of this bill, writes:

Teen parents who are themselves dependents or wards of the juvenile court face challenges not encountered by other young parents and are too often separated, both temporarily and permanently, from their children. Although California has implemented some protections, including preventing foster youth from voluntarily placing a child in foster care without consulting an attorney, many parenting juvenile court involved youth continue to be placed in a position of entering into custodial arrangements without understanding the available options, the terms of the arrangement or the direct and collateral consequences that can permanently disrupt the parent-child relationship.

For more than a decade, Youth Law Center has worked with jurisdictions in California and across the county to implement Just Beginning (also known as “Baby Elmo”), a visitation program for incarcerated teen parents to maintain contact, provide developmentally appropriate interactions, and improve overall parenting relationships with the child. Issues around custodial arrangements have been the number one parenting issue that Just Beginning participants report they face even after being released.

AB 1371 would provide important protections for juvenile court involved parenting youth by providing the opportunity to consult with counsel and to make information decisions before voluntarily limiting custody of their children.

1. Expansion of a dependent, nonminor dependent or ward’s right to consult with legal counsel

As discussed in Comment 2, existing law provides that if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time that a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision, the program of supervision shall not be undertaken until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 301.) This bill would expand the requirement that a dependent, nonminor dependent or ward consult with legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any information or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody. Additionally, this bill would require the social worker or probation officer note in the dependent, nonminor dependent or ward’s case file whether the youth consulted with legal counsel or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and the consultation did not occur, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

The Children’s Law Center, a co-sponsor of this bill, writes the following:

In 2008, AB 2483 was passed to prevent parenting foster youth from voluntarily placing their children in foster homes or agreeing to a program of supervision by the child welfare system without first consulting with their attorneys. However, it left a gap in the law when parenting foster youth are voluntarily limiting their custodial rights but not through a formal program of supervision. In those situations the law does not specify that the parenting foster youth first have an opportunity to consult with an attorney. As a result, young foster parents are entering into custodial arrangements without understanding the full terms or true implications of the arrangement.

This bill empowers parenting foster youth to make informed decisions by expanding the circumstances in which they have the opportunity to consult with counsel prior to voluntarily limiting custody.

Support: Alliance for Children’s Rights

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: Children’s Law Center of California; Youth Law Center

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation:

AB 1838 (Ting, 2016) would have made a pregnant minor or nonminor dependent eligible for a foster care payment for their child during the last three months before the expected date of birth, as specified, subject to a verification of pregnancy. This bill was vetoed by the Governor.

AB 260 (Lopez, Ch. 511, Stats. 2015) See Background.

AB 2483 (Bass, Ch. 132, Stats. 2008) requires that if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision shall not take place until the minor parent has consulted with Counsel.

SB 500 (Keuhl, Ch. 630, Stats. 2005) established the Whole Family Home, established a second caregiver payment for the child of a foster youth, and created the requirement for a shared responsibility plan between the foster caregiver and the dependent parent.

Prior Vote:

Senate Human Services Committee (Ayes 5, Noes 0)

Assembly Floor (Ayes 76, Noes 0)

Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 17, Noes 0)

Assembly Human Services Committee (Ayes 7, Noes 0)

Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 11, Noes 0)

**************

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Senator Wiener, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: AB 1371

Subject: Juveniles: ward, dependent, and nonminor dependent parents

SUMMARY

This bill affirms and expands the rights of minors, nonminor dependents and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

ABSTRACT

Existing law:

1. Establishes the jurisdiction of the dependency court over children who have suffered or are at substantial risk of suffering serious physical harm inflicted nonaccidentally upon the child by the child’s parent or guardian or as a the result of the failure or inability of his or her parent or guardian to provide adequate supervision. (WIC 300, et seq.)
2. Requires the court to make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a minor from his or her home. (WIC 361)
3. Establishes circumstances under which family reunification services should be provided for families and stipulates instances when the court should order reunification services need not be supplied to a parent or guardian, as specified. (WIC 361.5 (b))
4. Permits a social worker to undertake a program of supervision of the child in lieu of filing a petition to remove the child, as specified. Requires that if a program of supervision is undertaken, the social worker shall attempt to ameliorate the situation which brings the child into the jurisdiction of the dependency court by providing or arranging to contract for all appropriate child welfare services within specified time limits. (WIC 301)
5. Prohibits a program of supervision from being undertaken if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and has appointed counsel until the parent has consulted with his or her counsel. The program of supervision includes a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program. (WIC 301 (c))
6. Makes a Legislative declaration that a child of a minor parent or nonminor dependent parent shall not be considered to be at risk of abuse or neglect solely on the basis of information concerning the parent’s or parents’ placement history, past behaviors, or health or mental health diagnoses occurring prior to the pregnancy, as specified. (WIC 361.8. (a))
7. Prohibits removal of a child from a parent who is a foster child unless it can be demonstrated to the court that reasonable efforts were made to provide services designed to prevent removal of the child from the parent, and these efforts were unsuccessful. Further requires efforts be made to utilize resources of the parents’ extended family, social services agencies, caregivers and other service providers. (WIC 361.8 (b))
8. Authorizes a court to deny reunification services to a parent under certain circumstances, including that parental rights have been terminated or permanently severed for a sibling of the child with the same parent, that a parent is a registered sex offender, has abandoned the child, and a number of other factors. However, requires a court not to consider termination of parental rights for a sibling, unless other factors are present if the parent is a foster child. (WIC 361.5, WIC 361.8)

This bill:

1. Expands the social worker’s requirement to have a foster child consult with legal counsel prior to authorizing voluntary family reunification or voluntary family maintenance or similar programs, to additionally require the same consultation for a parent who is a nonminor dependent or ward of the delinquency court.

1. Expands the prohibition of removal from a parent who is a foster child unless a social worker can demonstrate reasonable efforts were made to provide services to also include the same requirement in cases where the parent is a ward of the delinquency court.
2. Expands the list of crimes that trigger the inclusion of consideration that a parent’s rights have been terminated or severed to include that a parent knowingly participated in the sexual exploitation of a child, as specified.
3. Requires that a parent who is a dependent or ward of the juvenile court be advised of the right, and have the opportunity to consult with, his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody. Establishes the same requirement prior to recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, as specified.

FISCAL IMPACT

According to an analysis by the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this bill is unlikely to create a reimbursable state mandate because the additional workload required on counties is minimal and the number of cases that these provisions would apply to is relatively small.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

Purpose of the bill:

According to the author, while current law requires a parenting foster youth to consult with an attorney prior to entering into a voluntary reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, that requirement does not extend to other custody agreements. For example, the author states that foster children are not required to consult with an attorney prior to entering a guardianship agreement with a relative for care of their children, and other custody arrangements.

“AB 1371 gives foster youth an opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to voluntarily limiting his or her custody,” the author states. The author further states that consultation with an attorney will ensure the youth has a full understanding of the agreement and its implications and will protect the rights of the parenting youth, the child and the family as a unit.

Background

Approximately 61,400 California children were in out-of-home foster care as of October 1, 2016, according to data produced by UC Berkeley’s Child Welfare Indicators website. The state’s child welfare system is structured to protect children who have been or are at risk of being abused, neglected or exploited by providing intensive services to families in order to keep them together. If a court determines maintaining the family is not in the best interest of the child, the child is removed and the child welfare agency arranges for and monitors placement of the child in the safest and least restrictive environment possible.

Outcomes for foster children are poor: Children and youth have increased rates of chronic health conditions, low educational achievement, mental illness, developmental disabilities, and high rates of unintended pregnancy. Approximately one-third of the children in foster care are adolescents of reproductive age (14 to 20 years), and researchers have documented a correlation between being in foster care and higher pregnancy rates. A longitudinal study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall on California adolescents in foster care found half of the 19 year olds surveyed reported having been pregnant, and documented other heightened pregnancy risks among teens in foster care.^[1]

Parenting foster youth

According to CDSS, there were 1,014 parenting youth in the foster care system in 2015, the most recent year with complete date. Those parents had 1,193 children. Of that number, 105 children – or 9 percent – were subject to child welfare petitions, as identified in the chart below.

UC Berkeley Child Welfare Indicators Project

Researchers at the Children’s Data Network at the University of Southern California (USC) and the UC Berkeley Child Welfare Indicators Project in 2013 published a report that identified high rates of parenting among foster youth. The authors wrote that “tracking births that occur over time provides a more complete picture of the number youth who are parenting during their teens. Among girls in foster care at age 17, more than 25 percent had given birth at least once before age 20.”^[2] Repeat teen births are not uncommon. Among girls in foster care who first gave birth before age 18, nearly 40 percent went on to have a second teen birth.

Additionally, researchers at USC found a correlation between parenting foster youth and reports of abuse or neglect about their own children. Specifically, 15.8 percent of the children of teen mothers who were not reported to child protective services as victims of maltreatment became the subject of CPS reports by age 5. The number of children, who were the subject of child welfare cases, as reflected above, is smaller. “In contrast, the corresponding rates of children reported among those born to a mother with an unsubstantiated or substantiated report (of maltreatment) were 30.7 percent and 39.8 percent.”^[3]

Related legislation:

AB 1838 (Ting, 2016) would have made a pregnant minor or nonminor dependent eligible for a foster care payment for their child during the last three months before the expected date of birth, as specified, subject to a verification of pregnancy. It was vetoed by the Governor.

AB 2483 (Bass, Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008) requires that if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision shall not take place until the minor parent has consulted with Counsel.

SB 500 (Keuhl, Chapter 630, Statutes of 2005) established the Whole Family Home, established a second caregiver payment for the child of a foster youth, and created the requirement for a shared responsibility plan between the foster caregiver and the dependent parent.

COMMENTS

This bill provides the same protections for foster youth to consult with their attorneys prior to entering into voluntary placement agreements that they currently have prior to entering into a voluntary reunification agreement. It extends the same protections to parenting youth who are in the delinquency system. The bill requires the social worker or probation officer to allow a youth to consult with an attorney prior to entering a voluntary placement agreement for their child. However, there is no requirement for the social worker or probation officer to document that the consultation occurred, was refused, or that the opportunity to consult was provided.

Staff recommends the following amendment:

WIC 361.8 (c) Except as provided in Section 301, prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent, or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, the parent shall be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consult with his or her legal counsel. The social worker or probation officer shall note in the case file whether the dependent, nonminor dependent or ward consulted with legal counsel, or if the opportunity for consultation was provided and did not happen, the reason that the consultation did not occur.

PRIOR VOTES

POSITIONS

Support:

Children’s Law Center of California (Co-Sponsor)

Youth Law Center (Co-Sponsor)

Children Now

National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter

Oppose:

None received.

-- END --

1. Courtney, Mark, et all. “Findings from the California Youth Transitions to Adulthood Study: Conditions of Youth at age 19,” Chapin Hall, University of Chicago, 2016. P 143 ↑

2. Putnam-Hornstein, et al., “California’s Most Vulnerable Parents: When Maltreated Children Have Children,” November 2013. ↑

3. http://casala.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Vulnerable_Parents_Full_Report_11-11-13.pdf ↑

Date of Hearing: May 17, 2017

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1371

Author:(Mark Stone) – As Amended Ver:May 2, 2017

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill expands and affirms the right of minors, nonminor dependents, and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel and be provided reunification and/or remedial services prior to their children being removed from their custody. Specifically, this bill:

1. Includes parents who are nonminor dependents or wards of the juvenile court in the requirement that a parent who is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court consult with his or her counsel prior to a program of supervision being undertaken.
2. Requires a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent to be advised of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer making custody or guardianship arrangements for the child of the ward.
3. Expands certain requirements regarding family reunification services and termination of parental rights to wards who are parents, rather than only applying those provisions to dependents who are parents.

FISCAL EFFECT:

This bill is unlikely to create a reimbursable state mandate because the additional workload required on counties is relatively minimal and the number of cases that these provisions would apply to is relatively small.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. The purpose of California’s Child Welfare Services (CWS) system is to protect children from abuse and neglect and provide for their health and safety. When children are identified as being at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal jurisdiction and children are served by the CWS system through the appointment of a social worker. Through this system, there are multiple opportunities for the custody of the child, or his or her placement outside of the home, to be evaluated, reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation with the child's social worker, to help provide the best possible services to the child. The CWS system seeks to help children who have been removed from their homes reunify with their parents or guardians, whenever appropriate, or unite them with other individuals they consider to be family.
2. Purpose. While it is recognized that system-involved youth face many challenges related to their time in care, it is also acknowledged that youth who are pregnant or parenting while under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court face numerous challenges of their own. A study conducted by the Center for the Study of Social Policy entitled “Pregnant and Parenting Youth in Foster Care,” states that it is crucial for pregnant and parenting youth to be aware of and fully understand their legal rights and options regarding placement needs and permanency.

According to the author’s office, “Young parents in foster care are especially at risk of losing temporary or even permanent custody of their children. California has worked hard to strengthen and protect these family units. While attorney consultation is requirement for a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, it is not required for other types of custody arrangements such as arranging a guardianship agreement with a relative.”

Analysis Prepared by: Jessica Peters / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 25, 2017

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES

Blanca Rubio, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1371 (

Author:Mark Stone) – As Amended Ver:April 5, 2017

SUBJECT: Juveniles: ward, dependent, and nonminor dependent parents

SUMMARY: Expands and affirms the right of minors, nonminor dependents, and wards of the court who are parents to consult with legal counsel prior to their children being removed from their custody.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Includes parents who are nonminor dependents or wards of the juvenile court in the requirement that a parent who is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court consult with his or her counsel prior to a program of supervision being undertaken.
2. Requires, in the case of a child for whom one or both minor parents have been adjudged wards of the court, as defined by current law, that:
3. Family reunification services still be provided in instances where the sole reason for not providing such services relates to previous court termination of such services for any siblings or half siblings because the parent(s) failed to reunify with the sibling or half sibling or relates to the previous severance of parental rights over any sibling or half sibling, as specified; and
4. A party seeking involuntary foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child to demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been made to provide remedial services in order to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful, as specified.
   
5. Requires a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent to be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer, as specified, including:
6. Arranging any informal or formal custody agreement which includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody; or
7. Recommending that a nonparent seek the legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent.
8. Makes technical changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes a state and local system of child welfare services, including foster care, for children who have been adjudged by the court to be at risk or have been abused or neglected, as specified. (WIC 202)
2. Requires the court to make a determination as to whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of a minor from his or her home, as specified. (WIC 361)
3. Allows a juvenile court to adjudge a child a ward or a dependent of the court for specified reasons, including but not limited to if the child has been left without any provision for support, as specified. (WIC 300)
4. States that the purpose of foster care law is to provide maximum safety and protection for children who are currently being physically, sexually, or emotionally abused, neglected, or exploited, and to ensure the safety, protection, and physical and emotional well-being of children who are at risk of harm. (WIC 300.2)
5. States the intent of the Legislature to preserve and strengthen a child’s family ties whenever possible and to reunify a foster youth with his or her biological family whenever possible, or to provide a permanent placement alternative, such as adoption or guardianship. (WIC 16000)
6. Establishes circumstances under which family reunification services should be ordered to be provided for families and stipulates instances when, upon the court finding clear and convincing evidence, reunification services need not be supplied to a parent or guardian, as specified. (WIC 361.5 (b))
7. Declares Legislative intent that a child shall not be considered to be at risk of abuse or neglect solely because of the age, dependent status, or foster care status of his or her parent. (WIC 300)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

Child Welfare Services: The purpose of California’s Child Welfare Services (CWS) system is to protect children from abuse and neglect and provide for their health and safety. When children are identified as being at risk of abuse, neglect or abandonment, county juvenile courts hold legal jurisdiction and children are served by the CWS system through the appointment of a social worker. Through this system, there are multiple opportunities for the custody of the child, or his or her placement outside of the home, to be evaluated, reviewed and determined by the judicial system, in consultation with the child's social worker, to help provide the best possible services to the child. The CWS system seeks to help children who have been removed from their homes reunify with their parents or guardians, whenever appropriate, or unite them with other individuals they consider to be family. There are currently over 64,000 children and youth in California’s child welfare system.

Extended foster care: In September 2010, Governor Brown signed AB 12 (Beall), Chapter 559, Statutes of 2010, which extended foster care benefits for eligible youth aging out of the foster care system. Rather than leave youth without support on their 18th birthday, AB 12 provides transitional youth, referred to as nonminor dependents, with access to resources and mentorship until they turn 21. AB 12 provides these youth with the opportunity to experience independent living in supervised living environments and the opportunity to obtain educational and employment training in order to better prepare them for a successful transition into adulthood and self-sufficiency.

In order to qualify for extended foster care, youth must meet at least one of the five defined program criteria, including:

1. Being enrolled in a high school or equivalent program;
   
2. Being enrolled in a college, community college, or vocational program;
   
3. Being employed at least 80 hours a month;
   
4. Participating in a program or activity designed to remove barriers to employment; or
   
5. Being unable to do one of the above requirements due to a medical condition.

Nonminor dependents must also sign an agreement within 6 months of turning 18 to remain in foster care, reside in an eligible placement, and agree to work with their social worker to meet goals of the youth’s Transitional Living Plan.

Pregnant and parenting foster youth: While it is recognized that system-involved youth face many challenges related to their time in care, it is also acknowledged that youth who are pregnant or parenting while under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court face numerous challenges of their own. Teen mothers are less likely to finish high school, more likely to live in poverty, and can face poorer health conditions than slightly older mothers. The children of teenage parents have a heightened risk of prematurity, low birth rate, and neonatal mortality and in young adulthood, children of adolescent mothers tend to experience low levels of education and higher rates of mental health issues.

While data and research concerning the parenting experiences of foster youth and other mistreated adolescents are relatively scarce, several studies have highlighted large disparities between maltreated and non-maltreated youth in rates of pregnancy and early childbearing. A longitudinal study conducted by researchers at the University of Chicago’s Chapin Hall on California adolescents in foster care found that half of the 19 year olds surveyed reported ever being pregnant, and that two-thirds of young foster women who were pregnant by age 19 described their pregnancy as unintended. More than 34% of foster youth who were sexually active reported using no contraception in the prior 12 months, as compared to 15% of non-system-involved youth of the same age.

A study conducted by the Center for the Study of Social Policy entitled “Pregnant and Parenting Youth in Foster Care,” states that it is crucial for pregnant and parenting youth to be aware of and fully understand their legal rights and options regarding placement needs and permanency. The study goes on to say:

“Regardless of the youth’s ultimate decisions surrounding the pregnancy, it is important that both mothers and fathers are aware of their legal rights and are directly and immediately connected to quality representation. When young women in foster care first become pregnant, they need to be informed of all their options by someone who can present accurate, unbiased, and value-neutral choices. This includes information about family planning, parenting, legal guardianship, voluntary placement, and adoption. Such information should be given by persons who are qualified to provide full disclosure, such as nurses and attorneys, and the pregnant youth should be assisted to make decisions related to the pregnancy free from the pressures of her caretakers, caseworkers, and others.”

Need for this bill: According to the author’s office, “Young parents in foster care are especially at risk of losing temporary or even permanent custody of their children. California has worked hard to strengthen and protect these family units. While attorney consultation is requirement for a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, it is not required for other types of custody arrangements such as arranging a guardianship agreement with a relative. [This bill] gives foster youth an opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to voluntarily limiting his or her custody. An attorney will be able to review the proposed agreement with the youth to ensure there is a full understanding of the agreement and its implications. This bill will protect youth’s rights and focus on the needs of the child, the parent, and the family as a unit.”

In support of this bill, Children Now writes, “Parenting youth in the foster care system often face both the challenges of being in foster care as well as the challenges of being a young parent without considerable resources or supports. In 2008, AB 2483 was passed to prevent parenting foster youth from voluntarily placing their children in foster homes or agreeing to a program of supervision by the child welfare system without first consulting with their attorneys. However, it left a gap in the law when parenting foster youth are voluntarily limiting their custodial rights but not through a formal program of supervision. In those situations, the law does not specify that the parenting foster youth first have an opportunity to consult with an attorney. As a result, young foster parents are entering into custodial arrangements without understanding the full terms or true implications of the arrangement.”

Recommended committee amendments: In order to make a technical correction, committee staff recommends the following amendments:

On page 4, line 10 of the bill, make the following change:

8

(1) Paragraphs (10) and (11) of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5

9

shall not apply, unless one or more of the circumstances described

10

in paragraphs (1) to (9), inclusive, and paragraphs (12) to (16), (17),

11

inclusive, of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 apply.

PRIOR LEGISLATION:

AB 260 (Lopez), Chapter 511, Statutes of 2015, provided additional supports and services for parenting foster youth.

AB 2483 (Bass), Chapter 132, Statutes of 2008, specified that, if a parent is a dependent of the juvenile court at the time a social worker seeks to undertake a program of supervision for a child, and if counsel has been appointed for the minor parent, the program of supervision may not be undertaken until the minor parent has consulted with his or her counsel.

SECOND COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE. This bill was previously heard in the Assembly Committee on Judiciary on April 4, 2017 and was approved on a11-0 vote.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children’s Law Center, Sponsor

Youth Law Center, Co-sponsor

Alliance for Children’s Rights

Children Now

National Association of Social Workers, CA Chapter

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Kelsy Castillo / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089

Date of Hearing: April 4, 2017

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Mark Stone, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1371

Author:(Mark Stone) – As Amended Ver:March 28, 2017

PROPOSED CONSENT (As Proposed to be Amended)

SUBJECT: dependent, nonminor dependent, and ward parents: protection of rights AND FAMILY PRESERVATION

KEY ISSUE: IN ORDER TO BETTER PROTECT THEIR FAMILIES and THEIR CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS, SHOULD YOUNG PARENTS IN THE JUVENILE court SYSTEM, INCLUDING FOSTER YOUTH, WARDS AND NONMINOR DEPENDENTS, BE PERMITTED TO CONSULT WITH THEIR ATTORNEYs BEFORE alternative CUSTODIAL arrangements for their children are made?

SYNOPSIS

Parental rights are fundamental, and these fundamental rights apply equally to parents who themselves are part of the juvenile court system, whether as dependents, wards, or nonminor dependents. Unfortunately, young parents in the juvenile court system face formidable odds to keep their families together. In 2008 and again in 2013, the Legislature gave foster youth parents a fighting chance to stay with their children by requiring that they consult with an attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision for their children, and by providing increased efforts before their children can be removed from their care and additional reunification chances. (AB 260 (Lopez), Chap. 511, Stats. 2015; AB 2483 (Bass), Chap. 132, Stats. 2008.)

This bill, co-sponsored by the Children's Law Center of California, Public Counsel, and the Youth Law Center, seeks to better protect the rights of these vulnerable young parents in the juvenile court system and build on the prior legislation by doing the following: (1) expanding the requirement that young parents consult with their attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision to include wards and nonminor dependents; (2) providing wards, in more instances, with reunification services; (3) requiring that reasonable efforts be made to provide wards with services and that such efforts be unsuccessful before their children can be removed; and (4) requiring that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult with his or her attorney before a social worker or probation officer can either (a) arrange any custody agreement that includes a voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent, or (b) recommend a non-parent seek legal guardianship of the child.

The author writes that this bill "will protect a parenting youth’s rights and focus on the needs of the child, the parent, and the family as a unit." This bill is supported by the Alliance for Children's Rights, Children Now, and Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers, and has no known opposition.

SUMMARY: Expands the opportunity for youth in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems who are also parents to consult with an attorney before their children are removed from their care and better protects the ability of these parents to raise their children. Specifically, this bill:

1. Expands, to include parents who are wards or nonminor dependents, in addition to minor dependents, the requirement that if counsel has been appointed for that parent, a social worker may not undertake a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, for the child until that parent has consulted with counsel.
2. Eliminates, where one or both minor parent are wards, the provision that reunification services need not be provided in instances where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over any siblings or half siblings, as specified, unless other specified circumstances eliminating the need for reunification services also exist.
3. Requires, where one or both minor parent are wards, a party seeking foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful.
4. Requires that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer (a) arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent, or (b) recommending a non-parent seek legal guardianship.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Allows a juvenile court to adjudicate a child a dependent of the court as the result of abuse or neglect, as specified. (Welfare & Institutions Code Section 300. Unless stated otherwise, all further statutory references are to that code.)
2. Provides that a juvenile court has jurisdiction over a child when that child has committed acts that trigger delinquency jurisdiction rendering the child a ward. (Sections 601 and 602.)
3. Defines a “nonminor dependent” as a current or former foster youth who is between 18 and 21 years old, in foster care under the responsibility of the county welfare department, county probation department, or Indian Tribe, and participating in a transitional independent living plan, as specified. (Section 11400 (v).)
4. Requires the court to appoint counsel for an unrepresented child in a dependency case, unless the court finds that the child would not benefit from the appointment of counsel. (Section 317 (c).)
5. Allows a social worker, after a determination that a child is within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court or will probably soon be within that jurisdiction, and with the consent of the parent, in lieu of filing a petition or subsequent to dismissal of a petition, to undertake a program of supervision. If the program of supervision is undertaken, the social worker shall arrange for appropriate child welfare services within the time periods specified. (Section 301.)
6. Provides that, if the parent is a dependent of the juvenile court and if counsel has been appointed for the parent, a social worker may not undertake a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, until that parent has consulted with counsel. (Id.)
7. Eliminates the provision that reunification services need not be provided, for a child for whom one or both minor parents were adjudged to be dependents of the juvenile court, where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over any siblings or half siblings, as specified, unless other specified circumstances removing the necessity for reunification services also exist. (Section 361.8 (b).)
8. Requires a party seeking foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child where one or both parents are dependents of the juvenile court to demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful. (Id.)

FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS: The first goal of the foster care system is to keep or reunify children with their parents, provided it can be done safely. That goal is no different if the parents themselves are already part of the system, whether as foster youth, wards of the juvenile court, or nonminor dependents. Unfortunately, these young parents face formidable odds to keep their families together. In 2008 and again in 2013, the Legislature gave foster youth who are parents a fighting chance to raise their children by requiring that they consult with an attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision for their children, and by providing both increased efforts before their children can be removed from their care and additional reunification chances. (AB 260 (Lopez), Chap. 511, Stats. 2015; AB 2483 (Bass), Chap. 132, Stats. 2008.) This bill expands on these important protections for young parents in several key ways. First, it would extend the requirement that foster children who are parents consult with their attorney before agreeing to a voluntary program of supervision to include ward and nonminor dependent parents. Second, it would require that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult his or her attorney before a social worker or probation officer does either of the following: (a) arranges any custody agreement that includes a voluntary relinquishment of custody by the parent, or (b) recommends a non-parent seek legal guardianship of the child. The bill would also provide wards, in more instances, with reunification services. Finally, the bill would require that reasonable efforts be made to provide wards with services and that such efforts be unsuccessful before their children can be removed in the first place.

The author writes of the need for the bill:

Young parents in foster care are especially at risk of losing temporary or even permanent custody of their children. California has worked hard to strengthen and protect these family units. While attorney consultation is require for a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program, it is not required for other types of custody arrangements such as arranging a guardianship agreement with a relative. AB 1371 gives foster youth an opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to voluntarily limiting his or her custody. An attorney will be able to review the proposed agreement with the youth to ensure there is a full understanding of the agreement and its implications. This bill will protect a parenting youth’s rights and focus on the needs of the child, the parent, and the family as a unit.            

Pregnant and Parenting Foster Youth – Data and Difficulties. Currently, there are no comprehensive data on the size of the state’s population of pregnant and parenting foster youth, but evidence of higher pregnancy and parenting rates for foster youth exists. Researchers connecting Child Protective Services data with birth records in California found that, of girls in foster care at the age of 17, more than one-quarter had given birth at least once during their teens. Of girls in foster care who had given birth at least once before the age of 18, over one-third had more than one birth in their teens. (Emily Putnam-Hornstein et al., California's Most Vulnerable Parents: When Maltreated Children Have Children (Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Nov. 2013).) These findings were corroborated by a much smaller, more in-depth study that interviewed more than 700 17-year-old foster youth and former foster youth in California and found that just over one-fourth of respondents had been pregnant and that 30 percent had been pregnant more than once. (Mark Courtney et al., Findings from California Youth Transitions to Adulthood Study (Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago 2014).)

While parenting can present any young parent with significant challenges, those challenges are magnified for youth in the juvenile court system:

Parenting youths in foster care are among the most vulnerable respondents in neglect and abuse proceedings. Not only are they in foster care, but also, as parents and expectant parents, they are subject to a heightened level of scrutiny by virtue of living in a highly structured environment staffed with mandated reporters.

Our youth-in-care clients almost always face allegations by foster parents or staff members in congregate care settings, such as mother-child placements or maternity residences. Some common allegations against young mothers in foster care are being missing from care—or “awoling”— either with or without the subject child and either prior to or during pregnancy; missing curfew either with or without the subject child and either prior to or during pregnancy; taking the child to homes or locations not cleared and approved by the agency; failing to follow directives or suggestions on the care of the subject child from an agency staff member or a foster parent; failing to attend school, a General Educational Development program, or job training; behaving in a difficult-to-control manner in a congregate care facility or a foster home; and not complying with recommended therapeutic treatment or medication management or both for a mental health diagnosis such as bipolar disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, or posttraumatic stress disorder.

(Rebecca Horwitz, Protection v. Presentment, When Youth in Foster Care Become Respondents in Child Welfare Proceedings, 45 Clearinghouse Review: Journal of Poverty Law and Policy Numbers 9-10, 421, 426 (Jan.-Feb. 2012) (footnotes omitted).)

The John Burton Foundation adds that "[p]arenting foster youth fall into the double cross-hairs of foster care and teen parenthood. Educationally, they fall far behind their peers, with a rate of high school graduation 13 percent lower than non-parenting foster youth and 25 percent lower than their non-foster youth peers. As young, often single parents, two out of three will live at, or below the poverty line in adulthood. Most troubling, children of parenting foster youth are a full five times more likely to be maltreated and placed into foster care themselves." (Amy Lemley, Moving Parenting Foster Youth Out of the Shadows (March 13, 2013).)

Adds the Youth Law Center, in support of this bill: "Teen parents who are themselves dependents or wards of the juvenile court face challenges not encountered by other young parents and are too often separated, both temporarily and permanently, from their children."

Parental rights are fundamental, and these fundamental rights apply equally to parents who themselves are part of the juvenile court system, whether as dependents, wards or nonminor dependents. The juvenile court's power to protect children is moderated by the parents' fundamental constitutional right to care, custody, and management of their child, which "will not be disturbed except in extreme cases where a parent acts in a manner incompatible with parenthood." (In re Marquis D. (1995) 38 Cal. App. 4^th 1813, 1828.) Young parents in the juvenile court system are extremely vulnerable and their children are as well, making this a prime group to provide with greater assistance in hopes of preserving these young families and helping both parents and children.

Legislation in 2008 Provided Certain Safeguards for Foster Youth Parents Before Agreeing to Voluntary Arrangements, and This Bill Expands on Those Safeguards: Child welfare services may be provided voluntarily even if a child is not made a dependent of the court. These voluntary programs allow social workers to provide children in specified situations with services to help maintain the family, prevent harm to the child, and avoid removal to the foster care system. Specific situations where voluntary services can be provided include families whose children are in potential danger of abuse, neglect, or exploitation, who are willing to accept services and participate in corrective efforts, and where it is safe for the children to remain in their home with only the provision of services. (Sections 16506.) The parent of the child subject to the voluntary services program must first consent to those services. While this program is completely voluntary, placing parents can lose their child should they fail to comply with the terms of the voluntary program.

Minor dependent parents who do not have equal bargaining power with their social worker, and who do not first consult with their attorney, may not understand that these voluntary programs are truly voluntary and may not realize that they could lose their children should they fail to comply with the terms of the voluntary program. While voluntary services may help a family undergoing short term difficulties, such as an illness or a loss of a job, they could be unnecessary in some situations and harmful in others. A teen parent’s attorney can counsel the parent to help them make the right decision for themselves and their child.

AB 2483 (Bass), Chap. 132, Stats. 2008, addressed these concerns by preventing dependent parents in the foster care system from placing their children in a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program for the child, until that parent has consulted with counsel. That legislation did not in any way prevent a young parent from placing his or her child in the voluntary program. It just helped ensure that the young parent had fully considered the potential benefits and risks of the voluntary placement program before making that difficult decision.

This bill expands on the protections afforded to young parents under AB 2483 in two key ways. First, it expands to parents who are nonminor dependent or wards the requirement, now only applicable to dependent parents, that they consult with counsel before a social worker may seek to place their child in a voluntary program of supervision, including a voluntary family reunification program or a voluntary family maintenance program. Wards and nonminor dependents, like dependents, may not fully understand that these programs are truly voluntary and may not realize that they can lose their children should they fail to comply with the terms of the voluntary program. Consulting with their attorney before agreeing to the program will ensure that the wards and nonminor dependents understand the risks and benefits of the voluntary program, just like minor dependents.

Second, this bill requires that a parent who is a dependent, nonminor dependent, or ward must be informed of the right, and have the opportunity, to consult with his or her legal counsel prior to a social worker or probation officer (a) arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by that parent, or (b) recommending a non-parent seek legal guardianship of the child. While these custodial arrangements are not permanent, they could be the first step to a permanent loss of parental rights. This provision of the bill will help ensure that young parents in the juvenile court have the opportunity to better understand their legal rights and make informed decisions before giving up custody of their child, even temporarily, which should, in turn, help preserve these vulnerable families. This bill in no way prevents the placements. It simply helps ensure that these young parents have the opportunity to fully understand the pros and cons, as well as the legal ramifications, of the placement before agreeing to the custodial arrangement changes.

Clarifying Amendments Help Ensure Bill's Provisions Work Together Seamlessly: In order to ensure that there is no confusion between the requirement that these youth consult with an attorney before entering a voluntary program of supervision and the requirement that they be afforded the opportunity to consult with counsel before a custody agreement or guardianship is arranged, the author proposes to amend the bill to clearly distinguish the two situations by making the following change:

Section 361.8(c): Except as provided in Section 301, prior Prior to a social worker or probation officer arranging any informal or formal custody agreement that includes a temporary or permanent voluntary relinquishment of custody by a parent who is a ward of the juvenile court or a dependent or nonminor dependent parent, or recommending that a nonparent seek legal guardianship of the child of a ward, dependent, or nonminor dependent parent, the parent shall be advised of the right and have the opportunity to consult with his or her legal counsel.

Legislation From 2015 Better Protects Parenting Youth in the Dependency System and This Bill Further Expands on Those Important Protections: AB 260, Chap. 511, Stats. 2015, added to the protections afforded to young parents in the juvenile court system in several important ways, two of which are relevant to the current bill. First, AB 260 eliminated a court's ability to not to order reunification services for a child for whom one or both minor parents were adjudged to be dependents of the juvenile court and where there has been a termination of reunification services for, or permanent severance of, parental rights over any siblings or half siblings, unless other circumstances exist. This helps ensure that reunification services, necessary to help parents and children stay together, are provided to these young parents more often. Second, AB 260 required that a party, seeking foster care placement of, or termination of parental rights over, a child with one or both parents who are minor dependents, demonstrate that reasonable efforts were made to provide remedial services designed to prevent the removal of the child and that these efforts were unsuccessful. Again, this requirement helps ensure that young parents in the foster care system receive needed support and services before their children can be removed from their care.

This bill expands these protections to wards, who are just as vulnerable as dependents and who also require extra assistance to help preserve their families. Thus, under this bill, wards will be able to get reunification services in more instances and more efforts will have to be made to provide services to wards before their children can be removed in the first place. This will help ensure that wards, like foster youth, have a fighting chance to keep their children and preserve their families.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Children’s Law Center of California (co-sponsor)

Public Counsel (co-sponsor)

Youth law Center (co-sponsor)

Alliance for Children's Rights

Children Now

Los Angeles Dependency Lawyers

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334