BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 368 Page 1 SENATE THIRD READING SB 368 (Liu) As Amended September 2, 2011 Majority vote SENATE VOTE : 40-0 HUMAN SERVICES 6-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0 ----------------------------------------------------------------- |Ayes:|Beall, Jones, Ammiano, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Harkey, | | |Grove, Hall, Portantino | |Blumenfield, Bradford, | | | | |Charles Calderon, Campos, | | | | |Davis, Donnelly, Gatto, | | | | |Hall, Hill, Lara, | | | | |Mitchell, Nielsen, Norby, | | | | |Solorio, Wagner | |-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------| | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY : Gives juvenile courts the authority to limit a parent or guardian's right to make decisions about the regional center and other developmental services for a child with developmental disabilities, and to appoint a developmental services decisionmaker. Additionally, this bill : 1)Includes changes to provisions of AB 104 (Budget Committee), Chapter 37, Statutes of 2011, related to how the juvenile court will determine whether a minor is competent enough to participate in juvenile court proceedings based on a determination of whether the minor is developmentally disabled. 2)Includes technical clean-up to SB 1115 (Public Safety Committee), Chapter 178, Statutes of 2010, including changes to add authorized representatives to the individuals permitted to request confidential records or information, related to minors with developmental disabilities, and add surgeons and clinical counselors to the list of professionals not required to reveal this confidential information. EXISTING LAW gives the juvenile court the authority to limit a parent or guardian's right to make educational decisions on behalf of his or her child, and to appoint an "education rights SB 368 Page 2 holder" to make those decisions. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee analysis of the bill as amended July 14, 2011, costs associated with this legislation should be minor and absorbable within existing resources. COMMENTS : Need for this bill: The child welfare system seeks to protect the safety and wellbeing of children who are at risk of, or have experienced abuse or neglect. This includes the child's educational needs and goals. When the parents of abused or neglected children are found by the court to be unsuitable to make decisions on their behalf, the court may appoint a responsible adult to serve as the child's "education rights holder" under California law. However, according to the author, abused or neglected children with developmental disabilities are not afforded the same protection, and therefore, may not have the advocacy and authorization needed to fully access the services and supports they are entitled to through the Lanterman Act. This bill seeks to create a structure, parallel to that of the "education rights holder" for education-related decisions, for children with developmental disabilities. Regarding amendments changing provisions of AB 104, the author states: The amendments clarify Department of Developmental Services' (DDS) Trailer Bill language related to the ability of the court to determine eligibility for regional center and developmental center services. AB 2212 (Fuentes), Chapter 671, Statutes of 2010 clarified that a minor's developmental immaturity was appropriately considered in a court's competency determination. DDS became concerned that the determination of competency would also somehow confer an entitlement to regional center services. Therefore, the DDS Trailer Bill (AB 104) deleted the statute established by AB 2212 and instead required that regional center directors take responsibility for determining whether or not a juvenile is competent to stand trial due to a developmental disability. SB 368 Page 3 However, not all regional center directors have the expertise to determine competency. Because trailer bills take effect immediately, current law now requires these competency determinations to be made by regional center directors. This has caused significant confusion in juvenile courts throughout the state. The proposed amendments to Ýthis bill] ensure that there is an appropriate process in place for determining mental competency in the juvenile court system while also making it clear that such a determination does not entitle a juvenile to regional center services under the Lanterman Act. Analysis Prepared by : Michelle Doty Cabrera / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089 FN: 0002605