BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2292 Page 1 ASSEMBLY THIRD READING AB 2292 (Nielsen) As Amended April 10, 2012 Majority vote JUDICIARY 10-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Feuer, Wagner, Atkins, | | | | |Dickinson, Gorell, Huber, | | | | |Jones, Monning, | | | | |Wieckowski, Alejo | | | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Requires a juvenile court, at specified hearings, to consider the admissible and relevant evidence before returning a foster child to his or her parents. Specifically, this bill requires that at a review or permanency hearing for a dependent child or a delinquent child in the foster care system, the juvenile court must consider the admissible and relevant evidence when determining whether to return the child to his or her parents or guardian or retain the child in foster care. EXISTING LAW : 1)Provides that a child may become a dependent of the juvenile court and be removed from his or her parents or guardian on the basis of abuse or neglect. 2)Provides that a juvenile court may adjudge a minor as a ward of the court because the minor has committed criminal acts or is habitually disobedient or truant and may detain the minor if continuance in his or her home is contrary to the minor's welfare. Placement of detained minors may include foster care. 3)Requires the court, at the review hearing, to order a dependent child returned to the custody of his or her parents unless the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that returning the child would create a substantial risk of harm to the child. 4)Requires the court, at the permanency hearing, whether held AB 2292 Page 2 timely or properly continued, to order a dependent child returned to the custody of his or her parents unless the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that returning the child would create a substantial risk of harm to the child. 5)Requires the court to review the status of each ward of the court placed in foster care every six months. At review and permanency hearings, requires the court to order the child returned to the custody of his or her parents unless the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that returning the child would create a substantial risk of harm to the child. FISCAL EFFECT : None COMMENTS : This non-controversial bill seeks to ensure that juvenile courts carefully consider the evidence before rendering their decisions. Specifically, this bill requires that the court at review and permanency hearings for foster children, whether for dependent children or for wards of the court who are also foster children, consider relevant and admissible evidence before determining that it is safe to return a child to his or her parents or guardian. The author believes that this bill is necessary to protect children during the reunification process: "Protecting children should always be the priority of the judicial system. One aspect that needs to be addressed is how our court system handles reunification." If the child is removed from his or her parents, then an initial detention hearing is held either on the same day that the petition is filed or on the next court day to determine whether the minor should be further detained. Within 15 days of the dependency court's decision to detain the child, the court must hold a jurisdictional hearing to decide, based on a preponderance of the evidence, whether the child falls within the dependency court's jurisdiction. If the child continues to be detained, a dispositional hearing is held no later than 10 days after the jurisdictional hearing. The court must review the case of each foster child who has been removed from his or her parents every six months. At this review hearing, the court assesses the parents' progress towards possible reunification. The court can reunify the family and AB 2292 Page 3 dismiss the case, reunify the family and continue to monitor the family through family maintenance services, or maintain the case without, at that point, reunification. Generally within 12 months after the child is removed from his or her parents, the court must determine, in a permanency hearing, whether the child should be returned home or whether efforts to reunite the family should be terminated. If the child is not returned home, efforts could still continue to reunify the family. If reunification efforts end, the court must determine a different permanency plan for the child. Possibilities include adoption, legal guardianship or some other permanent arrangement. At each of the hearings affected by this bill - the review and the permanency hearings - there is a statutory presumption that a child should be returned to his or her parents or guardian. In order not to return the child, the court must be satisfied by a preponderance of the evidence that returning the child would create a substantial risk of detriment to the safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the child. The court must read and consider the social worker's report, as well as other reports or evidence submitted. This bill simply clarifies that the court must consider the relevant and admissible evidence before ruling. As such, this bill is declarative of existing law, which requires the court to consider the evidence before making an order. Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 FN: 0003347