BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1060|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1060
Author: Leno (D), et al.
Amended: 5/31/16
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/12/16
AYES: Jackson, Moorlach, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/27/16
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza
NOES: Bates, Nielsen
SUBJECT: Postadoption contact: siblings of dependent
children or wards
SOURCE: California Youth Connection
DIGEST: This bill requires the county placing agency, to the
extent practicable, to convene a meeting with the child, the
sibling of the child, the prospective adoptive parent, and a
facilitator for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily
execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement, and requires,
at the time of consideration of an adoption petition, the court
to inquire into the status of the development of a voluntary
postadoption sibling contact agreement.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
SB 1060
Page 2
1)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).)
2)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, including requiring the state or
county to do the following after parental rights are
terminated and the court orders the dependent child to be
placed for adoption:
Include in training for prospective adoptive parents
information about the importance of maintaining sibling
relationships;
Provide prospective adoptive parents with information
about the child's siblings, as specified; and
Encourage the prospective adoptive parents to make a
plan for facilitating postadoptive contact between the
child and any siblings. (Welf. & Inst. Code Sec. 16002.)
1)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.)
2)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.)
3)Allows a court to include in a final adoption order a
SB 1060
Page 3
postadoptive sibling contact agreement. (Welf. & Inst. Code
Secs. 366.26 and 366.29.)
4)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.)
This bill:
1)Requires, when parental rights are terminated and the court
orders a dependent child or ward to be placed for adoption,
the county adoption placing agency, to the extent practicable,
to convene a meeting with the child, the sibling of the child,
the prospective adoptive parent, and a facilitator for the
purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily execute a
postadoption sibling contact agreement, as specified.
2)Requires, at the time of consideration of an adoption
petition, the court to inquire into the status of the
development of a voluntary postadoption sibling contact
agreement.
3)Makes other conforming and technical 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
SB 1060
Page 4
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
states to pass legislation promoting sibling visitation for
foster children as early as 1999. (See AB 740, Chapter 805,
Statutes of 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,
Chapter 773, Statutes of 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
county, as soon as parental rights are terminated and the court
orders the dependent child to be placed for adoption, to convene
a meeting with the relevant parties for the purpose of
discussing a postadoption sibling contact agreement. This bill
also, at the adoption proceeding, requires the court to inquire
into the status of the postadoption sibling contact agreement.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Team meetings: Potentially significant increase in state
costs (General Fund*) for additional meetings to the extent
the meetings consist of child and family team (CFT) members.
Estimated costs assuming only 50 percent of the 6,400 annual
dependent adoptions require a CFT meeting could cost in the
range of $850,000 to over $1.7 million annually based on the
average duration of 3.7 hours per CFT meeting and the
attendance of one or two local agency representatives. These
costs do not include any additional time CFT members may incur
to identify and notify non-dependent siblings to coordinate
these meetings. Actual costs could be substantially higher to
the extent the proportion of dependents with siblings is
SB 1060
Page 5
higher than assumed above, or more than two CFT members
representing local agencies are in attendance at the meeting.
Sibling visitation: Potentially significant increase in state
costs (General Fund*) for local agencies to facilitate
additional sibling visits for dependent siblings of adopted
minors resulting from postadoptive sibling contact agreements.
Annual costs would be dependent on numerous factors that are
unknown at this time, including but not limited to the number
of adopted children with dependent siblings for which
postadoptive sibling contact agreements will be ordered, the
frequency of visits provided for in the agreements, and the
time involved for the social worker to provide for this
sibling visitation in each case (distance and duration).
Court impact: Minor workload impact and potentially future
cost savings to the extent the CFT meetings result in less
time spent during the court hearing on sibling visitation
issues.
Proposition 30*: Exempts the state from mandate reimbursement
for realigned responsibilities for "public safety services"
including the provision of child welfare services, however,
legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an
overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a
local agency for public safety services apply to local
agencies only to the extent that the State provides annual
funding for the cost increase. The provisions of Proposition
30 have not been interpreted through the formal court process
to date, however, to the extent the local agency costs
resulting from this measure are determined to be applicable
under the provisions of Proposition 30 could result in
additional costs to the state.
SUPPORT: (Verified 5/31/16)
California Youth Connection (source)
Alliance for Boys and Men of Color
SB 1060
Page 6
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California Court Appointed Special Advocates for Children
Children Now
Children's Law Center of California
Families NOW
Hillsides
John Burton Foundation
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
Public Counsel
OPPOSITION: (Verified5/31/16)
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the California Alliance of
Child and Family Services:
"Approximately 20 percent of foster youth exit to adoption each
year in California. Every child deserves a permanent family
that provides a safe, enriching and loving home, not just for a
few months but forever. When reunification with biological
parents is no longer possible, adoption by a relative or a
nonrelative family gives our foster youth the chance to grow up
in a loving and permanent family. Findings have found that
healthy relationships with an adopted youth's biological
siblings are critical to the success of the adoption being
permanent. SB 1060 strengthens the efforts of continued
sibling connections by requiring a facilitated meeting to create
a post adoption sibling contact agreement before the adoption is
finalized between the adoptive parents, the prospective adoptive
child/children and the siblings who will not be living together.
All parties will be allowed to decide whether to voluntarily
enter into this agreement. This meeting will elevate the
importance of sibling relationships within the adoption process
and will improve the lives of foster youth"
Prepared by:Nichole Rapier / JUD. / (916) 651-4113
5/31/16 21:31:43
SB 1060
Page 7
**** END ****