BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
SB 1060 (Leno)
Version: February 16, 2016
Hearing Date: April 12, 2016
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
NR
SUBJECT
Postadoption contact: siblings of dependent children
DESCRIPTION
This bill would require a court, in an adoption proceeding for a
dependent child, to order the convening of a child and family
team meeting, attended by at least a facilitator, the siblings
or their respective caregivers, and the prospective adoptive
parent or parents. The bill would require the participants of
the meeting to decide whether to voluntarily enter into a
postadoptive sibling contact agreement before the adoption is
finalized, and make other conforming changes.
BACKGROUND
In October 2008, Congress passed, and President Bush signed, the
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act
(Act) to promote permanent families for children and youth in
foster care by providing greater assistance to relative
caregivers and improving incentives for adoption. The Act also
extends assistance for foster children to age 21 and improves
education and health care for children and youth in foster care.
Further, the Act requires states to 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, visitation between them must occur frequently, unless
the visitation is contrary to their safety or well-being. (42
U.S.C. Sec. 671(a).)
Prior to passage of the Act, California was one of the first
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 2 of ?
states to pass legislation promoting sibling visitation for
foster children as early as 1999. (See AB 740, Ch. 805, Stats.
1999.) Since then California has enacted several additional
statutes to expand legal protections for sibling relationships.
Creating another mechanism by which the court may further
protect sibling relationships, SB 1099 (Steinberg, Ch. 773,
Stats. 2014) gave dependency courts the authority to order
visitation between dependent and non-dependent siblings in
specified circumstances. This bill seeks to further protect
sibling relationships by requiring the court, in an adoption
proceeding regarding a dependent child, to order the prospective
adoptive parents, the facilitator, the child, and any siblings
not party to the adoption, to attend a meeting where the group
will decide whether to enter into a postadoptive sibling contact
agreement.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing federal law requires states to 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, visitation between them must occur frequently, unless
it is contrary to their safety or well-being. (42 U.S.C. Sec.
671(a).)
Existing law states the intent of the Legislature to ensure that
siblings who are removed from the home will be placed in foster
care together, unless the placement is contrary to the safety or
well-being of any sibling. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 16002.)
Existing law requires a social worker, where possible and
appropriate, to place a child, who has been removed from his or
her parents or guardian because of abuse or neglect, together
with his or her siblings or half-siblings also being removed, or
to describe continuing efforts to place them together if they
are not initially placed together, or to explain why placing
them together is inappropriate. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
306.5.)
Existing law requires, when the court has ordered removal of a
child from the physical custody of a parent, the court to
consider whether there are any siblings under the court's
jurisdiction, and the appropriateness of maintaining those
sibling relationships. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 361.2.)
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 3 of ?
Existing law requires any order placing a child in foster care
to provide for visitation between a child and any siblings,
unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that
sibling interaction is contrary to the safety and well-being of
either child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 362.1.)
Existing law allows any person to petition the juvenile court to
assert a sibling relationship by blood, adoption, or through
affinity with a legal or biological parent with a child who is a
dependent of the juvenile court, and to request visitation with
that child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 388.)
Existing law allows a court to include in a final adoption order
a postadoptive sibling contact agreement. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Secs. 366.26 and 366.29.)
Existing law authorizes a parent to terminate a postadoptive
sibling contact agreement if it is determined by the parent that
sibling contact poses a threat to the health, safety, or
well-being of the adopted child. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec.
366.26.)
Existing law requires that if a minor has continuing involvement
with a parent or legal guardian, that the parent or legal
guardian shall be involved in the planning for permanent
placement and that any court order permanently placing the minor
shall include a specification of the nature and frequency of
visiting arrangements with the parent or legal guardian. (Welf.
& Inst. Code Sec. 727.3.)
This bill would additionally require siblings to be included in
the court order described immediately above.
This bill would require a court, in an adoption proceeding for a
dependent child, to order the convening of a child and family
team meeting, attended by at least a facilitator, the siblings
or their respective caregivers, and the prospective adoptive
parent, for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily enter
into a postadoptive sibling contact agreement before the
adoption is finalized.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 4 of ?
According to the author:
For California's foster children and youth, adoption is one of
the desired outcomes that the state child welfare system
strives to achieve. Unfortunately, siblings in foster care
sometimes are separated through the adoption process. For an
adoption to establish a lasting commitment between the child
and adopting parents, these elements of healing and support
are essential. Research also confirms that sustaining some of
the relationships with the biological family, especially
siblings, is most effective in combating the negative effects
of being removed from one's family and placed into foster
care.
2.Would require the court, in certain adoption proceedings, to
order the convening of a child and family team meeting to
discuss future sibling contact
The dependency process utilizes "family teams" to identify the
strengths and needs of a dependent child and his or her family,
and to help achieve positive outcomes for the safety,
permanency, and well-being. Family teams are comprised of
individuals convened by the placing agency, including but not
limited to the child, family, caregiver, caseworker, and mental
health representatives. (See Welf. & Inst. Code Secs. 16501 and
16501.1.)
This bill would require that the court, in adoption proceedings
regarding a dependent child, order the convening of a family
team meeting with the prospective adoptive parent or parents,
the prospective adoptive child, his or her siblings (or their
caretakers), and the adoption facilitator. At the meeting, this
bill would require that the participants decide whether to
voluntarily enter into a postadoptive sibling contact agreement
before the adoption is finalized.
A postadoptive contact agreement provides for contact between a
child and his or her birth parents and other birth relatives,
including siblings. These agreements can also provide for how
the adoptive family and birth family will share information
about the child in the future. Postadoption contact agreements
are intended to ensure children maintain an achievable level of
continuing contact when contact is beneficial to the child, and
the agreements are voluntarily entered into by the parties.
(See Fam. Code Sec. 8616.5.) This bill would necessarily
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 5 of ?
maintain the voluntary nature of these agreements, and would not
eliminate the ability of a parent to invalidate agreements that
compromise the safety or well-being of their adoptive child, but
by requiring that parents, siblings, and facilitators attend a
family team meeting, this bill will arguably help facilitate
more postadoption contact agreements and thereby fulfill the
Legislature's stated goal of maintaining beneficial sibling
relationships.
Staff notes that this bill would require the court to issue
orders over parties over whom the court may not have
jurisdiction. For example, if a prospective adoptive child had
a half sibling who was not in the dependency system, that
sibling would not be subject to the court's jurisdiction, and
therefore would not have to follow any orders issued by the
court. While it remains to be seen how often jurisdictional
issues will arise, this bill will, at the very least, ensure
that persons who do fall within the court's jurisdiction are
required to have a conversation about a postadoption sibling
contact agreement.
3.Would require the court to specifically include siblings in
court orders permanently placing a dependent child in a home
To maintain beneficial contact with a child's birth family, if a
dependent minor has continuing involvement with his or her
parents or legal guardians, existing law requires that the
parents or legal guardians are involved in the planning for a
permanent placement. Existing law also requires that the court
order placing the minor in a permanent home must include details
about the nature and frequency of visiting arrangements with the
parents or legal guardians.
This bill would add to the above requirement that the court
order must include details regarding the visiting arrangements
with siblings. This requirement is consistent with the stated
intent of the Legislature to maintain sibling relationships
unless contrary to the safety or well-being of the child. This
requirement is also consistent with existing considerations the
court must take into account with regard to sibling
relationships and dependent children.
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 6 of ?
4.Maintaining judicial discretion to ensure the dependent
child's safety
This bill would require the court, in every situation, to order
the convening of a family team meeting. Recognizing that there
are potential situations where a dependent child would not
benefit from any contact with a sibling, the author has agreed
to amend the bill to allow a court to exercise discretion. The
Executive Committee of the Family Law Section of the State Bar
of California (FLEXCOM), among other concerns, expresses concern
that this bill would make attendance at the meeting mandatory.
FLEXCOM writes, "the bill does not include any exceptions for
opting out, such as for cases of sibling abuse, or cases where
siblings have been privately adopted outside the dependency
system and who may not be interested in participating. In
addition, there is no clarifying language that any child
attending regardless of age shall be there with their respective
caregiver and/or counsel."
The language below would permit a court to bypass the ordering
of the meeting only if the court determined that such a meeting
may be detrimental to the child. This arguably strikes the
correct balance and will ensure that families are meeting to
discuss postadoption contact agreements, in all but the rarest
cases, where the court finds that sibling contact may be harmful
to the child.
Author's amendment:
On page 2, line 15, after "(b)" insert "Unless the court finds
that such a meeting may be detrimental to the child,"
Support : California Alliance of Child and Family Services;
Children Now; Families NOW; Hillsides; National Association of
Social Workers, California Chapter
Opposition : None known
HISTORY
Source : California Youth Connection
Related Pending Legislation : None known
SB 1060 (Leno)
Page 7 of ?
Prior Legislation :
SB 1099 (Steinberg, Ch. 773, Stats. 2014) required the court to
consider relationships between dependent and non-dependent
siblings, required additional documentation related to sibling
relationships in social workers' reports, and authorized a
dependent child to request sibling visitation, as specified.
AB 743 (Portantino, Ch. 560, Stats. 2010) made changes to the
standards for sibling visitation, interaction, and placement for
children in foster care to conform with the federal Fostering
Connections to Success Act.
AB 408 (Steinberg, Ch. 813, Stats. 2003) made changes in
dependency law to help achieve permanency for older children,
including authorizing the court to make orders to ensure that
sibling relationships are maintained.
AB 705 (Steinberg, Ch. 747, Stats. of 2001) ensured that sibling
relationships are considered at all appropriate hearings and
siblings are placed together when appropriate.
AB 1987 (Steinberg, Ch. 909, Stats. 2000) recognized the
importance of sibling relationships and required the court to
consider the existence, nature, and impact of a dependent
child's sibling relationships on the child's placement and
planning for legal permanence.
AB 740 (Steinberg, Ch. 805, Stats. 1999) expedited the procedure
for permanent placement of a sibling group.
**************