BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                             SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
                         Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
                             2015-2016  Regular  Session


          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Version: March 11, 2015
          Hearing Date:  June 9, 2015
          Fiscal: Yes
          Urgency: No
          NR   


                                        SUBJECT
                                           
              Child custody proceedings:  testimony by electronic means

                                      DESCRIPTION  

          This bill would require the court to allow a party, whose  
          deportation or detention by the federal Department of Homeland  
          Security materially affects his or her ability to appear at a  
          child custody proceeding, to present testimony and evidence, and  
          participate in mandatory child custody mediation, by electronic  
          means. 

                                      BACKGROUND  

          Courts must generally order social workers to provide services  
          to reunify a family if the parent has not voluntarily  
          relinquished his or her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code  
          Sec. 360(a).)  Reunification plans must be appropriate and based  
          on the unique facts of the family.  If parents successfully  
          complete the reunification plan, and reunification is in the  
          best interest of the child, children are typically released to  
          the custody of the parent.  In 2008, California expanded this  
          concept of tailoring reunification plans to the unique facts of  
          each family when it enacted AB 2070 (Bass, Chapter 482, Statutes  
          of 2008).  AB 2070 required that courts take into consideration,  
          among other factors, the particular barriers incarcerated and/or  
          institutionalized parents encounter in accessing court-mandated  
          reunification services, including parent-child bonding and the  
          likelihood of the parent's discharge within the reunification  
          timeframe.   
           
          Service members, who are often unable to participate in  
          contested custody and visitation proceedings due to deployment,  
          have also been given certain protections under both federal and  
          state law.  SB 1082 (Morrow and Ducheny, Chapter 154, Statutes  







          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Page 2 of ? 


          of 2005) created an expedited process for the modification of  
          child support orders for service members who are deployed  
          out-of-state.  AB 2416 (Cook, Chapter 466, Statutes of 2010)  
          further added to those protections by authorizing a court to  
          allow a deployed parent to participate in child custody  
          proceedings and mediation by electronic means. 

          Similar to AB 2416, this bill would help ensure that detained  
          and/or deported parents are able to participate in custody  
          proceedings and mediation by allowing them to participate by  
          electronic means. 

                                CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
           
          Existing law  provides that if a party's military deployment,  
          mobilization, or temporary duty will have a material effect on  
          his or her ability to appear in person at a regularly scheduled  
          custody hearing, the court shall, upon motion of the party: 
           hold an expedited hearing to determine custody and visitation  
            issues prior to the party's departure; or
           allow the party to present testimony and evidence and  
            participate in court-ordered child custody mediation by  
            electronic means, including, but not limited to, telephone,  
            video teleconferencing, or the Internet, to the extent that  
            this technology is reasonably available to the court and the  
            due process rights of all parties are protected.  (Fam. Code  
            Sec. 3047.)

           Existing law  requires the court to set contested custody or  
          visitation matters for mediation, and allows mediators,  
          consistent with local rules, to submit recommendations to the  
          court.  (Fam. Code Secs. 3170, 3183.)
          
           Existing law  requires the court to order reasonable  
          reunification services to assist parents who have been  
          incarcerated, institutionalized, detained, or deported including  
          contacting welfare authorities in a deported parent's country of  
          origin, to identify any available services that would  
          substantially comply with a juvenile court case plan  
          requirement, document parents' participation in those services,  
          and accept reports from local child welfare authorities as to  
          the parents' living situation, progress and participation in  
          services.  (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.5(e).)
          








          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Page 3 of ? 


           Existing law  allows the court to permit parties to appear by  
          telephone in family law cases if the court determines that  
          telephonic appearance is appropriate, and allows parties in  
          civil cases to appear by telephone, as specified.  (Cal. Rules  
          of Court 5.9, 3.670.)  

           This bill  would require the court to allow a party to present  
          testimony and evidence, and participate in mandatory child  
          custody mediation by electronic means if the party's deportation  
          or detention by the United States Immigration and Customs  
          Enforcement will have a material effect on his or her ability,  
          or anticipated ability, to appear in person at a child custody  
          proceeding. 

           This bill  would specify that "electronic means" includes, but is  
          not limited to, telephone, video teleconferencing, or other  
          electronic means that provide remote access to the hearing, to  
          the extent that this technology is reasonably available to the  
          court and protects the due process rights of all parties.

                                        COMMENT
           
           1.Stated need for the bill
           
          According to the author: 

            Teleconferencing and other electronic means are permitted  
            during child custody proceedings when a party is in another  
            state or a party's military deployment impacts their ability  
            to appear in person. However it is not currently done across  
            the state for detained or deported parents. While some  
            counties provide these services, in others the detained or  
            deported parent does not have a viable way to be present at  
            court.  This increases the chance that the parent will lose  
            custody of their child. What is missing is equal access across  
            the state to testimony by electronic means for parents who  
            cannot be physically present in the court due to being  
            detained or deported. AB 365 would require the courts to allow  
            any detained or deported parent to present testimony and  
            evidence by electronic means in contested child custody  
            hearings and in court-ordered child custody mediations, upon  
            request.  Electronic means includes telephone, video  
            conferencing, or the internet, provided that their use is  
            consistent with the due process right of all parties.








          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Page 4 of ? 



           2.Would provide detained and deported parents with additional  
            options to  participate in custody proceedings 
           
          When a parent cannot participate in a child custody proceeding  
          because he or she has been detained or deported, the court may  
          (1) postpone the proceeding, (2) hold the proceeding in the  
          parent's absence, or (3) allow the parent to participate via  
          telephone.  To ensure that those parents have the ability to  
          participate, this bill would require courts to allow the  
          proceeding to take place by electronic means, such as telephone  
          or video conferencing.  In order to ensure that courts are able  
          to comply with this requirement, this bill would only allow  
          participation by electronic means if the technology is  
          reasonably available to the court, and would require that the  
          electronic participation method protects the due process rights  
          of all parties.  This is identical to an option available to  
          deployed military parents created by AB 2416 (Cook, Chapter 466,  
          Statutes of 2010).

          In support, the Service Employees International Union SEIU  
          writes, "Testimony by electronic means is already available in  
          many states, as well as eleven counties in California.  Further,  
          teleconferencing and other electronic means are permitted during  
          child custody proceedings when a party is in another state or a  
          party's military deployment impacts their ability to appear in  
          person.  AB 365 merely extends equal access for parents who  
          cannot be physically present in court due to being detained or  
          deported.  AB 365 would bridge the gap in current law,  
          preventing families from being split unnecessarily."



           3.Consistent with policy to preserve parent-child relationships
            
           This bill would allow parents who have been detained or deported  
          to participate in child custody proceedings through electronic  
          means.  This is consistent with legislation enacted to ensure  
          that parents who are unable to be physically present in court  
          (e.g., deployed, incarcerated, and out-of-state parents) to  
          nonetheless meaningfully participate in child custody  
          proceedings.  Without the ability to participate in these  
          proceedings, the chance that a parent will lose custody of his  
          or her child increases significantly because the court is unable  








          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Page 5 of ? 


          to hear that parent's perspective. 
           
           In support, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts  
          writes "existing law currently gives the court the authority to  
          allow parties to appear by phone or other electronic means where  
          warranted and feasible.  This bill would require the court to  
          allow such electronic participation in dire situations involving  
          detention and possible deportation.  We believe this is  
          appropriate and can assist these families in adequately moving  
          through the custody process." 

           
            Support  :  Association of Family & Conciliation Courts (AFCC);  
          California Communities United Institute; California Partnership  
          to End Domestic Violence; First Focus Campaign for Children;  
          National Association of Social Workers - California Chapter;  
          Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

           Opposition  :  None Known 

                                        HISTORY
           
           Source  :  Author

           Related Pending Legislation  : None Known


           Prior Legislation  :

          SB 1064 (De Leon, Chapter 845, Statues of 2012), created uniform  
          statewide policies and practices that sought to eliminate family  
          reunification barriers in the child welfare system for immigrant  
          families.

          AB 2416 (Cook, Chapter 466, Statutes of 2010) allowed for  
          electronic access to family law proceedings by deployed military  
          members who might not otherwise be able to participate in their  
          children's custody cases because of deployment.

          SB 1082 (Morrow and Ducheny, Chapter 154, Statutes of 2005) See  
          Background.


           Prior Vote  :








          AB 365 (Cristina Garcia)
          Page 6 of ? 



          Assembly Floor (Ayes 73, Noes 1)
          Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 16, Noes 0)
          Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 9, Noes 1)

                                   **************