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