BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1099
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 2, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 1099 (Steinberg) - As Amended: April 29, 2014
Policy Committee: JudiciaryVote:9 -
0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill encourages visitation with siblings for children in
the dependency system. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a dependent child's social worker to include certain
information in his or her report to the court, for the
disposition hearing and thereafter, in situations where
siblings are not placed together, and requires the court to
consider that information at the periodic review hearing.
2)Allows a dependent child or nonminor dependent to petition the
court for visitation with a nondependent sibling who is in the
custody of a common legal or biological parent. Allows the
court to grant visitation with that sibling unless the court
determines that such visitation is contrary to the safety and
well-being of any of the siblings.
3)Requires that in order for a suspension of sibling interaction
to continue after periodic review hearings, the court must
make a renewed finding that sibling interaction is contrary to
the safety or well-being of either child.
4)Allows a dependent child or nonminor dependent to petition the
court for visitation with a nondependent sibling. Provides
that the court may grant a request for sibling visitation
unless it is determined by the court that sibling visitation
is contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the
siblings.
5)Contains codified intent language stating the intent of the
Legislature to preserve and strengthen a dependent child's
SB 1099
Page 2
sibling relationship with a nondependent sibling who remains
in the custody of a mutual parent subject to the court's
jurisdiction, and that the court has the authority to develop
a sibling visitation plan.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)State costs likely in the range of $325,000 to $650,000 (GF)
annually for increased workload to social workers to document
detailed information on sibling interaction efforts, assuming
an additional 15 minutes to 30 minutes annually for an
estimated 17,800 dependents who are not placed with siblings.
2)Unknown, but potentially significant state costs (GF) for
local agencies to facilitate additional sibling visits between
dependents and non-dependent children that the courts have not
previously granted.
3)Minor impact to court workload for the expansion of current
sibling visitation provisions.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Supporters, primarily children's advocates, county
welfare directors and the juvenile court judges, note that
last year the children's Bureau/Administration for Children,
Youth and Families (ACYF) released a report that found a
significant association between sibling visitation and both
permanency and well-being outcomes. In addition, all 50
states acknowledge that placing foster youth into the care of
relatives helps lessen the trauma of entering the system and
also better supports the healthy growth of the child due to
mutual familial, cultural, and community connections. The
maintenance of sibling relationships serves this same purpose
by offering a foster child at least one familiar constant
(their sibling) in the otherwise sea of strangers that make up
the child welfare system. SB 1099 aims to address some of the
shortcomings in the visitation process while also providing
clarity to existing circumstances that are often overlooked.
2)Background . In 2008, Congress passed the Fostering Connections
to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (Act), which, among
other things, made it a priority that siblings entering the
foster care system be placed together by requiring states to
SB 1099
Page 3
use "reasonable efforts" to place siblings together, unless
such placement is contrary to their safety or well-being. If
the siblings are not placed together, the Act requires that
visitation between them must occur frequently, unless the
visitation is contrary to their safety or well-being. It is
estimated there are approximately 37,450 dependents with
siblings in out-of-home care, of which 17,800 are not placed
together.
Prior to passage of the Act, California was one of the first
states to pass legislation promoting sibling visitation for
foster children as early as 1999. (AB 740 (Steinberg), Chap.
805, Statutes of 1999.) Since then, California has enacted
several additional statutes to expand legal protections for
sibling relationships. These laws have served to promote
sibling relationships when both children are in the dependency
system, but recent, unpublished cases indicate that courts
will not grant visitation in the rare case where one sibling
is in the foster system and the other remains in the legal
custody of the parent.
This bill seeks to address this situation by giving dependency
courts the authority to order visitation between dependent and
non-dependent siblings in specified circumstances.
Additionally, this bill updates existing sibling visitation
statutes to better encourage visits between siblings.
3)Related legislation . SB 1460 (Committee on Human Services)
2014, is the committee's annual federal compliance bill. One
provision of SB 1460 requires a probation officer to explain
why siblings are not placed together and what efforts he or
she is making to place the siblings together or why making
those efforts would be contrary to the safety and well-being
of any of the siblings. SB 1460 is before this committee
today.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)
319-2081