BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    






                             SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
                           Senator Ellen M. Corbett, Chair
                              2009-2010 Regular Session


          AB 1048
          Assemblymember Torrico
          As Amended June 1, 2009
          Hearing Date: July 7, 2009
          Health and Safety Code; Penal Code
          KB:jd
                    

                                        SUBJECT
                                           
                          Child Protection: Safe Surrender

                                      DESCRIPTION  

          This bill would extend the period during which a person may  
          safely surrender a baby at designated sites as long as the  
          proper procedures under the Safely Surrendered Baby law are  
          followed.  Specifically, this bill would:  (1) allow the safe  
          surrender of a baby up to 30 days old, rather than 72 hours; (2)  
          permit a fire agency to designate a safe surrender site, upon  
          approval of the local governing body; (3) immunize a safe  
          surrender site and its personnel from criminal, civil, or  
          administrative liability for a surrendered child prior to taking  
          actual physical custody of the child, or prior to the time the  
          surrender site or its personnel knows, or should know, that the  
          child has been surrendered; and (4) require the Department of  
          Social Services to report specified information to the  
          Legislature.

                                      BACKGROUND  

          SB 1368 (Brulte, Chapter 824, Statutes of 2000) enacted the  
          Safely Surrendered Baby law, which allows the surrender of a  
          newborn by a parent or other responsible person to a safe  
          surrender site, where the abandoned newborn may receive medical  
          and other care until the county takes over custody of the  
          newborn.  This legislation was introduced to provide mothers of  
          unwanted newborns a safe alternative to abandonment of the child  
          in trash bins, alleys, or other places where the babies would be  
          unprotected and could pass away.  SB 1368 created safe places  
          (such as an emergency room of a hospital) where a person may  
                                                                (more)



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 2 of ?



          surrender the baby and, if they change their mind, may retrieve  
          the baby within a specified time.  The bill also provided  
          immunity from criminal prosecution for violation of the child  
          abandonment laws to the person who safely surrendered the  
          newborn.  A sunset date of January 1, 2006 was part of the  
          original bill, which was later removed by SB 116 (Dutton,  
          Chapter 625, Statutes of 2005), making the safe surrender law  
          permanent.

          SB 1368 also contained reporting provisions that required the  
          Department of Social Services (DSS) to report to the Legislature  
          biennially on various data related to the effectiveness and  
          continuing need for the Safely Surrendered Baby law.  As of June  
          2008, 218 babies have been safely surrendered in California.

          This bill is substantially similar to the author's AB 1873  
          (2006), which had a 30-day safe surrender period, and AB 81  
          (2007) and AB 2262 (2008), which contained a 7-day safe  
          surrender period.  All three were vetoed by the Governor.  The  
          Governor's veto message to AB 81 stated:

            California's Safe Surrender Law already provides an  
            emergency alternative for a woman in crisis who may  
            otherwise abandon, abuse, or kill her baby.  California's  
            law was carefully crafted to balance the creation of a  
            safe surrender option while preserving the rights of  
            children.  The current 72-hour period contained in law  
            allows for a no-questions-asked safe surrender of a  
            newborn, and is supported by research and statistics  
            which indicate that most neonaticide occurs within the  
            first day.  Experts have raised concerns that instead of  
            improving child safety, increasing the time that a baby  
            may be surrendered from 72 hours will put newborns in  
            greater risk by keeping them in an unsafe environment  
            without proper care and supervision.

                                CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
           
          1.    Existing law  makes it a crime for a parent or other person  
            entrusted with a child younger than 14 years of age to abandon  
            the child (Pen. Code Sec. 271) and to fail to provide for the  
            child or to present the child to an orphanage or similar  
            institution as an orphan.  (Pen. Code Sec. 271a.)
           
            Existing law  makes it a crime for a parent willfully to fail,  
            without lawful excuse, to provide a child with necessary food,  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 3 of ?



            shelter, medical assistance, or other remedial care. (Pen.  
            Code Sec. 270.)
             
            Existing law  protects from prosecution under the state's child  
            abandonment laws a parent or other person having lawful  
            custody of a child 72 hours or younger, who voluntarily  
            surrenders physical custody of the child to personnel on duty  
            at a safe surrender site.  (Pen. Code Sec. 271.5.)
             
            Existing law  provides a procedure for the surrender of  
            newborns 72 hours or younger by a parent or other responsible  
            person at a hospital or a site (safe surrender site)  
            designated by the county, without incurring criminal liability  
            under the state's child abandonment laws. (Health & Saf. Code  
            Sec. 1255.7.)
             
            This bill  would allow the surrender of babies up to 30 days  
            old by a parent or another responsible person.

             This bill  would require, by January 1, 2013, the Department of  
            Social Services to begin reporting to the Legislature, on an  
            annual basis, specified information and statistics related to  
            the safe surrender program.

           2.Existing law  authorizes a county to designate a site for the  
            surrender of a newborn up to 72 hours old under the Safely  
            Surrendered Baby law. (Health & Saf. Code Sec.  
            1255.7(a)(1)(A).)

             This bill  would authorize a local fire agency, upon approval  
            of the appropriate local governing body, to designate a site  
            for the safe surrender of a newborn under the Safely  
            Surrendered Baby law.
           
           3.  Existing law  provides immunity from civil, criminal, and  
            administrative liability to a safe surrender site or its  
            personnel that accepts custody of a surrendered child in good  
            faith belief that action is required or authorized under the  
            Safely Surrendered Baby law, including instances where the  
            child is older than 72 hours or the person surrendering the  
            child did not have lawful physical custody of the surrendered  
            child. (Health & Saf. Code Sec. 1255.7(h).)

             This bill  would further immunize from civil, criminal, and  
            administrative liability a safe surrender site or its  
            personnel for a surrendered child prior to taking actual  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 4 of ?



            physical custody of the child and prior to the time that the  
            site or its personnel knows or should know that the child has  
            been surrendered.

                                        COMMENT
           
              1.   Stated need for the bill
             
          According to the author, this bill expands the scope of a  
          life-saving law.  Despite the protection of anonymity and  
          confidentiality that the current law provides, the author  
          asserts that the stringent 72-hour provision fails to account  
          for factors such as postpartum depression, language and  
          geographic barriers, and the lack of public awareness.  The  
          author states that these factors may prevent parents from making  
          a coherent and informed decision on such a crucial matter.  

          The California State Auditor released a report in April 2008 on  
          the Safely Surrendered Baby Law, which found, among other  
          things, that funding for the program, public awareness, and the  
          information provided to counties about the program were  
          insufficient.  (Bureau of State Audits, Safely Surrendered Baby  
          Law: Stronger Guidance from the State and Better Information for  
          the Public Could Enhance Its Impact, April 2008 Report 2007-124  
          (Report).)  The State Auditor further found that the number of  
          abandoned babies had previously been underreported by DSS.  The  
          safe-surrender law originally required DSS to report all  
          children abandoned before they reached the age of one year.   
          However, DSS only gathered and reported statistics on abandoned  
          babies seven days old and younger.  According to the audit, at  
          least 404 babies have been abandoned between 2001 to 2007, as  
          opposed to 175, the previously reported number. 

          The author reports that shortly after the Auditor's report was  
          released, at least two babies were abandoned.  One of the babies  
          was a 9-day-old baby abandoned on the track of a Vacaville  
          school.  The mother left the baby within a half-mile of a fire  
          station and a hospital, both designated safe-surrender sites.   
          The baby was too old to be safely surrendered and the mother had  
          suffered a psychotic breakdown.

          Finally, the author states that currently twenty-two states have  
          safe surrender provisions that give parents a month or longer to  
          surrender their baby.  North Dakota and Missouri have gone so  
          far as to allow a parent up to one year without the threat of  
          prosecution for child abandonment provided that the child is  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 5 of ?



          left with a health care provider.  

          2.    Extending the safe surrender law to apply to 30-day old  
          infants may be premature  

              a.   Insufficient data to determine whether safe surrender  
               laws should be extended to apply to 30-day old infants
           
            Under the Safely Surrendered Baby Law, a person may surrender  
            an infant to a designated "safe-surrender" site, either a  
            hospital or some other designated site such as a fire station.  
             Research shows that young women who abandon their newborns do  
            so because they hope to keep the birth a secret.  Existing law  
            therefore permits a person to surrender the infant with  
            complete anonymity.  The surrendering party is asked to  
            voluntarily fill out a medical questionnaire, but otherwise no  
            questions are asked.  A bracelet attached to both the newborn  
            and the surrendering party permits a parent to reclaim the  
            child within 14 days, so long as relinquishing the child to  
            the parent would not endanger the child.  Within 48 hours of  
            taking custody of the child, the safe-surrender site must  
            notify the relevant child protection agency, which in turn  
            begins the process of making the child a dependent of the  
            court and setting the stage for foster care or adoption. 

            When SB 1368 (Brulte) was enacted, it contained the sunset  
            clause of January 1, 2006 because at the time there was no  
            empirical data presented to the Legislature that the proposal  
            would indeed save any baby's life.  From January 2000 to  
            September 2004, the reports received from the California  
            Department of Social Services (CDSS) showed a total of 64  
            babies safely surrendered, which lead to the elimination of  
            the sunset date of January 1, 2006, and making the law  
            permanent (SB 116 (Dutton), Chapter 625, Statutes of 2005).

            According to the 2008 report released by the State Auditor,  
            there have been 218 babies safely surrendered since the law's  
            inception.  Statistics provided by CDSS indicate that the  
            number of babies surrendered in California has generally  
            increased each year since the safe surrender law became  
            effective.  In 2006, 59 newborns were surrendered, compared to  
            30 in 2004 and just two in 2001.  (Report, page 9.)  The  
            majority of the infants (approximately 145) were less than a  
            day old, or a day old (approximately 48) at the time of their  
            surrender.  Twelve of the infants were two days old, and four  
            were three days old.  (Report, pages 51-59.)  As previously  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 6 of ?



            stated, the state auditor also found that the number of  
            abandoned infants in California had been underreported by  
            CDSS.  CDSS only gathered and reported statistics on abandoned  
            babies seven days old and younger, instead of reporting  
            statistics for all babies abandoned before they reached a year  
            old.  According to the auditor's report, at least 404 babies  
            have been abandoned between 2001 to 2007, as opposed to 175,  
            the previously reported number.  (Report, pages 25-26.) 

            Supporters of the bill contend that the current 72 hour  
            threshold is too stringent and does not account for situations  
            where, for example, mothers suffer from postpartum depression  
            psychotic breaks weeks after giving birth.  The author also  
            points out that some women may live in counties where safe  
            surrender sites are not readily accessible.  In this situation  
            a woman may have to find a mode of transportation into a  
            different county to leave the infant at a safe-surrender site,  
            which may not be feasible within 72 hours.  The author also  
            points to the higher reported number of abandoned babies as  
            evidence that existing law needs to be adjusted to allow for  
            the surrender of infants older than 72 hours.

            While the higher reported number of abandoned babies is worthy  
            of the Legislature's attention, it still does not, by itself,  
            provide enough information on which to determine whether a  
            need exists for the state to allow the safe surrender of  
            babies up to 30 days old.  In a sampling of 40 babies  
            classified as abandoned in the Child Welfare Services Case  
            Management System, 10 babies were over three days old.   
            (Report, pages 59-61.) This sampling, however, only provides  
            limited data and otherwise suggests no pattern or profile  
            regarding individuals who are at risk of abandoning their  
            children which could serve as a basis for expanding existing  
            law.  There are no complete statistics or data which break  
            down the ages of the abandoned infants beyond the seven day  
            mark, which leaves the Legislature with little guidance in  
            setting the appropriate threshold for safely surrendering  
            infants.

            In light of the absence of accurate empirical data for infants  
            over seven days old, this committee may wish to consider  
            whether it is premature to expand the existing safe surrender  
            program to infants up to 30 days old, and whether this bill  
            should instead allow for the safe surrender of infants up to  
            seven days old.  

                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 7 of ?



            SHOULD THIS BILL BE AMENDED TO INSTEAD ALLOW FOR THE SAFE  
            SURRENDER OF INFANTS UP TO SEVEN DAYS OLD?

            b.   States' safe surrender laws differ in key respects
           
            The National Adoption Information Clearinghouse identifies 16  
            states that provide for the safe surrender of babies up to 72  
            hours old, and 5 states that provide for the safe surrender of  
            babies up to 7 days old.  Four states allow the safe surrender  
            of babies up to 14 days old; New York uses 5 days and 14  
            states use 30 days as the cut-off age for the infant to be  
            safely surrendered.  Six other states vary from 45 days to 90  
            days, and two states (Missouri and North Dakota) allow babies  
            up to one year to be surrendered. However, Missouri does not  
            allow anonymity of the person who surrenders the child.  Of  
            those states that allow babies up to 7 days to be surrendered,  
            several do not permit anonymity of the person surrendering the  
            child and do not permit relinquishment by anyone other than  
            the birth parent.
             
             The variance in the statutes among the states likely reflects  
            a variance in realities and problems affecting each respective  
            state.  Accordingly, it is difficult to justify a change in  
            California law simply based on the laws in other states.   
            Further, one should not just look at the age threshold in a  
            vacuum.  If the Legislature is to allow for the surrender of  
            infants up to 30 days old, should it also then require parents  
            to provide more information upon the child's surrender?   
            Should parents still be completely absolved of criminal  
            prosecution regardless of the age or condition of the child?   
            Any changes to current law should be balanced so as to ensure  
            the safety of the infant and the rights of the parents.  As  
            previously discussed, more accurate data is critical in order  
            to craft the appropriate balance.  
           
            c.    Existing alternative to abandonment or surrender after 72  
            hours (3 days)  

            For children who are older than a few days, the existing  
            voluntary relinquishment process enables parents to  
            voluntarily free their children for adoption.  Voluntary  
            relinquishment offers safeguards to birth parents, the child,  
            and the adoptive parents.  Further, according to the County  
            Welfare Directors Association of California (CWDA), voluntary  
            placement rules allow a parent to place a child in foster care  
            for up to six months.  These two paths offer both short- and  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 8 of ?



            long-term options for parents who are overwhelmed or are  
            suffering from postpartum depression.  These options, which  
            are easily accessed at the local level, would also allow for  
            the collection of important medical history information,  
            provide full disclosure and due process for both the mother  
            and father of the baby, and allow for potential future contact  
            between the baby and the birth family, according to the group.

            Given the voluntary relinquishment process, this committee may  
            wish to consider whether it is necessary to expand current law  
            to 30-day old infants. 

          3.    Bill would provide immunity prior to taking physical  
          custody of a child  

          Current law immunizes from criminal, civil, or administrative  
          liability a safe-surrender site or its personnel "that accepts  
          custody of a surrendered child ? in the good faith belief that  
          action is required or authorized by this section ?" (Health &  
          Saf. Code Sec. 12557(h).)  The immunity is qualified, as it does  
          not apply to liability for personal injury or wrongful death,  
          including injury resulting from medical malpractice.  The  
          immunity also applies where there is a good faith belief that  
          action is required, even in instances where the child is older  
          than 72 hours or the parent or individual surrendering the child  
          did not have lawful physical custody of the child.

          This bill would provide additional immunity from criminal,  
          civil, or administrative liability to a safe-surrender site or  
          its personnel "prior to its taking actual physical custody of  
          the surrendered child" and also "prior to the time the site or  
          its personnel know(s), or should know, that the child as been  
          surrendered."  According to the author, there are instances  
          where infants are not directly surrendered to personnel, but  
          left outside of a safe-surrender site.  The author states that  
          these additional immunities are to ensure that safe-surrender  
          sites and personnel are not exposed to liability prior to  
          actually discovering the child.  

          This is arguably an unnecessary addition to the law.  Until the  
          safe-surrender site or personnel accepts the child into its  
          custody, it has no obligation and therefore no exposure to  
          liability whatsoever.  Accepting the child into its custody has,  
          from the inception of the SSB law, meant "physical custody," as  
          nobody but the person surrendering the child could claim any  
          legal custody rights to the child for purposes of the SSB law.   
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 9 of ?



          In fact, all other subdivisions in the section refer to the  
          physical custody of the child.  The duties relating to the care  
          of the child do not begin until after the safe- surrender site  
          or its personnel accepts custody of the child, which is when the  
          qualified immunity rule comes into play.

          The expansion of immunity to "prior to the time the site or its  
          personnel know(s) or should know that the child has been  
          surrendered" suffers from the same deficiency:  it is  
          unnecessary as no obligation to act would materialize until the  
          physical custody of the child was actually transferred, and by  
          that time someone would know about it.   Accordingly, this  
          committee may wish to consider whether these immunities  
          provisions should be removed from the bill.

          SHOULD THE PROVISIONS CREATING ADDITIONAL IMMUNITIES BE DELETED  
          FROM THE BILL?

          4.    Fire stations to designate safe-surrender sites  

          Under existing law, a hospital is a safe-surrender site, and the  
          county may designate other safe-surrender sites as it deems  
          necessary.  The rationale for the county choosing the  
          safe-surrender site is that the county will ultimately be  
          responsible for the safety of the child and will take the child  
          into its custody, temporarily until the 14-day period for  
          reclaiming the child has expired, and on a more permanent basis  
          after the initial hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code  
          Section 300 to declare the child a ward of the state if the  
          child is not reclaimed.

          Fire stations have been used in some counties as safe-surrender  
          sites, with the cooperation of cities within the counties.   
          These fire stations have provided educational campaigns and have  
          participated successfully in training programs on what to do  
          should a baby be surrendered at their site.  This bill contains  
          a provision that would authorize a fire agency to designate a  
          safe-surrender site upon approval by the local governing body  
          (by the city if the fire agency is a city fire department;  
          county fire agencies may already be designated by the county).   
          Safe surrender personnel are trained and equipment may have to  
          be provided onsite to take care of any medical emergencies that  
          a surrendered baby may have at the time of surrender. 

          Given the growing paucity of hospitals, particularly in inner  
          cities, designation of additional safe surrender sites in inner  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 10 of ?



          cities may well be appropriate.  However, such designations  
          should probably be done only in conjunction with the city or  
          county governments, which is seemingly already authorized under  
          existing law. 

          5.   This bill would create new reporting requirements for CDSS   

          This bill would require, by January 1, 2013, CDSS to begin  
          reporting to the Legislature, on an annual basis, specified  
          information and statistics related to the safe surrender  
            program.  Specifically, the report must include: (1) the number  
          of children one year of age or younger who are found abandoned,  
          dead or alive, in the state for each year in which reporting is  
          required under this act; (2) the number of infants surrendered  
          pursuant to this act, with their approximate age; (3) the number  
          of medical history questionnaires completed in those cases; (4)  
          the number of instances in which a parent or other person having  
          lawful custody seeks to reclaim custody of a surrendered child,  
          both during and after the initial period following surrender,  
          and the outcome of those cases; (5) whether a person seeking to  
          reclaim custody is the individual who surrendered the child; (6)  
          the number of children surrendered pursuant to this act who show  
          signs of neglect or abuse and the disposition of those cases;  
          and (7) the number of parents or legal guardians eventually  
          located and contacted by social workers.

          This portion of the bill would implement the State Auditor's  
          recommendation that CDSS be required to continue annual  
          reporting to the Legislature on the safe surrender law's impact.  
           These reports should provide the Legislature with vital  
          information necessary to assess the success and shortcomings of  
          existing law.

          6.   Opposition  

          A number of law enforcement and social service agencies strongly  
          support the safe-surrender law, but are opposed to extending the  
          surrender period to 30 days.  Opponents claim that the original  
          law was meant to address particular situations in which newborns  
          are at greatest risk of abandonment.  Expanding the law to 30  
          days, opponents claim, does nothing to address those particular  
          risks and will only create a number of unintended and unwanted  
          consequences, some of which may even put children at greater  
          risk. 

          The County Welfare Directors Association of California (CWDA)  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 11 of ?



          write that the 30-day provision is not supported by research on  
          child abandonment, is inconsistent with the policy of anonymity,  
          and circumvents well-considered child protection and  
          relinquishment policies.  CWDA points out that existing research  
          clearly distinguishes between women who kill or abandon babies  
          shortly after birth and those who endanger their babies later  
          on.  Research shows that mothers who kill or abandon newborns do  
          so within the first 24 hours because they are in a severe state  
          of denial about their pregnancy and/or have managed to keep  
          their pregnancy a secret.  Without a safe-surrender site that  
          maintains their anonymity and protects their secret, young women  
          in such a situation are likely to abandon a baby in an unsafe  
          place.  This is why the anonymity guaranteed by the safe  
          surrender is so essential. 

          CWDA claims that women who kill their babies after this initial  
          period do so for quite different reasons:  They may suffer from  
          postpartum depression or mental illness, or perhaps they are  
          motivated by a misguided belief that the child will be better  
          off dead or that God is commanding them to kill their child.   
          Clearly these women need help, but CWDA contends that  
          safe-surrender sites will not help them or their children.  CWDA  
          contends that women who have cared for their children for up to  
          30 days have probably not been able to keep this a secret from  
          family and friends.  They would not benefit, therefore, from the  
          anonymity of a safe-surrender site.  Of course, it is possible  
          that after the three-day period some women (or men for that  
          matter) may feel so overwhelmed that they feel that they can no  
          longer safely or adequately care for their child.  However, CWDA  
          points out that there are already existing methods for dealing  
          with this situation, such as "crisis nurseries" or lawful  
          relinquishment.  For example, existing voluntary relinquishment  
          laws enable a parent to surrender a child to a county child  
          welfare agency and to place a child in foster care for up to six  
          months.  According to CWDA, these options not only remove the  
          child from potential danger but also provide counseling, and  
          opportunity to gather critically needed medical information, and  
          better security for the rights of birthparents.  This process is  
          also better for children, who in the safe-surrender context  
          might be denied information about their parental and medical  
          history. 

          CWDA does not entirely oppose revisiting California's 72-hour  
          safe-surrender limit, suggesting instead that a law extending  
          the safe surrender period to 7 days would reasonably balance the  
          immediate risk to newborns and the need for safeguards provided  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 12 of ?



          by existing relinquishment laws. 

          The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and Los Angeles  
          County Sheriff also oppose AB 1048 for essentially the same  
          reasons set forth by CWDA.  In addition to the arguments made by  
          CWDA, these agencies pointed out that extending the time period  
          might result in abusive parents using the safe surrender law to  
          escape criminal responsibility for child abuse or neglect.  The  
          California State Association of Counties is also opposed to the  
          bill in its current form, but states that seven days is a more  
          appropriate expansion of the surrender period.
           
          Support  :  American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists;  
          Association of California Healthcare Districts; California  
          Attorneys for Criminal Justice;  California Catholic Conference;  
          California Fire Chiefs Association; Fire Districts Association  
          of California; California Medical Association; California State  
          PTA; California Professional Firefighters; California  
          Psychiatric Association; California Psychological Association;  
          City of San Jos?; League of California Cities; Yolo County Board  
          of Supervisors; California Commission on the Status of Women;  
          Kern Child Abuse Prevention Council   

           Opposition  : California Welfare Directors Association; Los  
          Angeles County Board of Supervisors; Los Angeles County  
          Sheriff's Department; California State Association of Counties
                                           
                                       HISTORY
           
           Source  :  Author

           Related Pending Legislation  :  AB 1049 (Torrico) would create the  
          Safely Surrendered Baby Fund and allow individual taxpayers to  
          designate on their tax returns, that a specified amount in  
          excess of their tax liability be transferred to the fund.  This  
          bill is pending in the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee.
           
          Prior Legislation  :

          AB 2262 (Torrico), 2008, would have allowed for the safe  
          surrender of a baby up to 7 days old, rather than 72 hours;  
          permitted a fire agency to designate a safe-surrender site, upon  
          approval of the local governing body; and would have immunized a  
          safe-surrender site and its personnel from criminal, civil, or  
          administrative liability, as specified.  The bill would have  
          directed the Department of Health Care Services, among others,  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 13 of ?



          to issue updated instructions on or before July 1, 2009 to  
          clarify what information was being gathered with respect to  
          surrendered babies and their mothers.  This bill was vetoed.

          AB 81 (Torrico), 2007, would have extended the age at which an  
          infant can be anonymously surrendered by a birth parent without  
          criminal liability for child abandonment under the  
          safe-surrender statute from 72 hours or younger to 7 days or  
          younger.  The bill would have also authorized a local fire  
          agency to be a safe-surrender site, as specified, and required  
          the Department of Social Services to conduct a statewide public  
          awareness campaign for the safe-surrender program and establish  
          a toll-free number to provide the public with information about  
          the program.  This bill was vetoed.

          AB 1873 (Torrico), of 2005-06, sought to expand the  
          safe-surrender law to allow a parent or individual with lawful  
          custody of a child 30 days old or younger to be surrendered to a  
          designated safe-surrender site.  This bill was vetoed.  

          SB 116 (Dutton), Chapter 625, Statutes of 2005, deleted the  
          sunset date of January 1, 2006 from the safe-surrender law. 

          SB 1413 (Brulte), Chapter 103, Statutes of 2004, immunized from  
          civil damages a person who assists another person to voluntarily  
          surrender physical custody of a newborn under the safe-  
          surrender law, provided that the person is not compensated,  
          renders the assistance in good faith, and believes in good faith  
          that the person being assisted is a parent or other person  
          having lawful custody of the newborn.  "Assistance" was defined  
          to include providing transportation or accompanying the parent  
          or other individual to the safe-surrender site.  The bill  
          further specified that this immunity would not extend to acts or  
          omissions constituting gross negligence.  

          SB 139 (Brulte), Chapter 150, Statutes 2003, provided that a  
          child may be surrendered at any hospital or other designated  
          safe-surrender site.  Previously, a designated employee at a  
          hospital emergency room or other location was the only person  
          permitted to accept a baby.

          AB 2817 (Maddox), Chapter 1099, Statutes 2002, requires school  
          districts to include information regarding the safe-surrender  
          law in sex education classes.

          SB 1368 (Brulte), Chapter 824, Statutes of 2000, as described  
                                                                      



          AB 1048 (Torrico)
          Page 14 of ?



          above, originally enacted the state's safe-surrender law.  

           Prior Vote  :

          Assembly Public Safety Committee (Ayes 5, Noes 0)
          Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 8, Noes 2)
          Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 14, Noes 3)
          Assembly Floor (Ayes 67, Noes 9)

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