BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 545|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 545
Author: Mitchell (D)
Amended: 6/13/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/11/13
AYES: Yee, Berryhill, Emmerson, Evans, Liu, Wright
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 7-0, 6/25/13
AYES: Evans, Walters, Anderson, Corbett, Jackson, Leno, Monning
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 4/29/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Dependent children: placement: nonrelative
extended family member
SOURCE : Children's Law Center of California
DIGEST : This bill extends the definition of a nonrelative
extended family member (NREFM) to include those adults who have
a relationship with a relative of the child, as specified.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Provides that a minor may be removed from the physical custody
of his/her parents and become a dependent of the juvenile
court for serious abuse or neglect, or risk of serious abuse
or neglect, as specified.
CONTINUED
AB 545
Page
2
2.Requires the social worker to immediately release a child in
temporary custody to the child's parent, guardian, or
responsible relative, unless specified conditions exist.
3.Provides that when a court orders removal of a child from
his/her home, the court must order a social worker to
supervise the care, custody, control, and conduct of the
child.
4.Allows the social worker to place a dependent child in the
home of a relative or a NREFM, or a licensed foster care
facility.
5.Provides that a caseworker must consider the proximity of the
natural parents when placing a child in out-of-home care in
order to facilitate visitation and family reunification, and
requires, prior to placement in long-term foster care, the
county to make diligent efforts to locate an appropriate
relative.
6.Defines "relative" as an adult who is related to the child by
blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of
kinship, including step relatives, relatives whose status is
preceded with "great," "great-great" or "grand," or the spouse
of any of these persons; provides that only grandparents,
aunts, uncles, or siblings shall be eligible for preferential
consideration for placement.
7.Defines NREFM as an adult caregiver who has an established
familial or mentoring relationship with the child, and
provides that NREFMs being considered for placement of a child
shall have their home evaluated pursuant to the same standards
set forth in the regulations for the licensing of foster
family homes.
This bill expands the definition of a NREFM to include "an adult
caregiver who has an established familial relationship with a
relative of the child, or a familial or mentoring relationship
with the child."
Background
When abused or neglected children are taken from the custody of
CONTINUED
AB 545
Page
3
their parents, social workers are required to release a child
temporarily to a responsible parent, guardian, or relative,
unless a specified condition exists. Social workers may also
release a child into the custody of a NREFM, defined as "any
adult caregiver who has established a familial or mentoring
relationship with the child," or place the child in a licensed
foster or group home. A social worker must then petition the
court to declare the child a dependent of the court, and within
a relatively short period of time, the court determines whether
it needs to assert jurisdiction over the child, and limit or
deny parental rights.
According to the Senate Judiciary Committee analysis, it has
been reported that some county agencies have interpreted the
definition of NREFM so narrowly, as to preclude an infant or
young nonverbal child from being able to form the requisite
familial or mentoring relationship with a nonrelative, thereby
excluding many potential placements with adults who have close
relationships with a sibling, parent, or other family member of
the infant. Accordingly, this bill expands the definition of
NREFM to include persons who have an established familial
relationship with a relative of the child.
The established policy in California is to place dependent
children first with relative caregivers in order to strengthen
family bonds and facilitate reunification. As a result, social
workers are required to first seek relatives with whom they may
place a dependent child, prior to placing a child in any other
out-of-home care. NREFMs are not sought out by social workers,
but are instead adults who volunteer to provide a home for a
particular child because of a close, preexisting relationship
with the child. Under existing law, a person is a NREFM only if
he/she has an existing relationship with the child.
Prior Legislation
AB 914 (Saldana, 2007), would have extended the evaluation and
approval requirements for NREFMs to nonrelative community
support system caregivers, as defined. This bill died in the
Assembly Human Services Committee.
AB 1695 (Aroner, Chapter 653, Statutes of 2001), conformed state
law, with recent federal law, relating to the placement of
foster children in licensed or approved homes of non-relatives
CONTINUED
AB 545
Page
4
and relatives; and created a new category of "NREFMs" who are
subject to the same approval process as relatives and licensed
caregivers.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/26/13)
Children's Law Center of California (source)
Children Now
County Welfare Directors Association
East Bay Children's Law Offices
Executive Committee, Family Law Section of the State Bar
Home Start
Junior Leagues of California
Juvenile Court Judges of California
Los Angeles Dependency Court Lawyers
National Association of Social Workers
Women's Foundation of California
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/26/13)
Advokids
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, the Welfare &
Institutions Code currently defines a NREFM as 'any adult
caregiver who has an established familial or mentoring
relationship with the child.' The author states that
unfortunately, some judges and hearing officers have recently
interpreted this to mean that a person close to the family who
is interested in caring for a young, nonverbal child (instead of
that child going into a foster home) is precluded from doing so
because it is impossible to establish a relationship with a
child who is not yet able to communicate. The author claims the
law requires clarification to ensure that potential NREFM
caregivers are not turned away.
In support of this bill, the Executive Committee of the Family
Law Section of the State Bar (FLEXCOM) writes, "FLEXCOM supports
an expanded definition of the nonrelated extended family member
placement option. When placement outside the care of a parent
is required, the statutory scheme of dependency favors the
maintenance of family and cultural ties. Thus, the hierarchy of
CONTINUED
AB 545
Page
5
placements a court can consider ranks relatives and family
friends above the use of foster care. In many instances, a
family friend can promote maintenance of these ties, even if
that person does not know the child."
The National Association of Social Workers writes, "It is
important that children are given the chance to be placed as
quickly as possible. In certain situations, such as with a
pre-verbal child, the definition of a NREFM should be extended
to include situations where the person has a relationship with
the family, since the child is not developmentally able to have
a relationship with the caregiver. This bill ensures that
pre-verbal children are able to find appropriate placements
quickly."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Advokids, in opposition to this
bill, argues that NREFM placements should only be considered by
the court if the NREFM comes forward within 30 days of a child
being detained.
Advokids writes, "expanding the pool of potential caregivers who
must be assessed by county agencies must not allow for ongoing
assessments throughout the post-dispositional period as it often
leads to devastating placement disruptions for young children
who require continuity of care to achieve healthy brain function
and development."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 77-0, 4/29/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway,
Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier,
Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Grove, Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein,
Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin,
Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea,
V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner,
Stone, Ting, Torres, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk,
Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Atkins, Donnelly, Vacancy
JL:ej 6/26/13 Senate Floor Analyses
CONTINUED
AB 545
Page
6
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED