Amended in Senate April 14, 2016

Amended in Senate March 28, 2016

Senate Bill No. 1336

Introduced by Senator Jackson

February 19, 2016

An act to amend Sections 358 and 361.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, relating to dependent children.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SB 1336, as amended, Jackson. Dependent children: placement with relatives.

Existing law requires a county social worker to investigate the circumstances of each child taken into temporary custody by a peace officer who has reasonable cause to believe the child is the victim of abuse or neglect. Existing law requires the social worker to conduct an investigation to identify and locate adult relatives of the child and to provide him or her with a specified relative information form. Existing law further requires the social worker to initiate an assessment of the suitability of a relative who requests that the child be placed with him or her.

Under existing law, the juvenile court is required to hold a hearing to determine the proper disposition to be made of a child adjudged a dependent of the juvenile court. Existing law requires the court to consider the social study of the child made by the social worker before the court arrives at its judgment. Existing law requires that, subsequent to the hearing, consideration for placement be given to relatives, as specified.

This bill would require the juvenile court to begin delete consider end delete begin insert make a finding as to end insert whether the social worker exercised due diligence in conducting his or her investigation to identify, locate, and notify the child’s relatives. begin delete The bill would require the court to continue the disposition hearing if the social worker did not exercise due diligence. end delete The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to clarify, if a child is receiving reunification services and a relative identifies himself or herself to a county child welfare agency, that the relative be evaluated by the county child welfare agency and a recommendation be made to the court as to whether the relative should or should not be considered for placement.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.  

It is the intent of the Legislature in amending
Section 361.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to clarify, if a
child is receiving reunification services and a relative identifies
himself or herself to a county child welfare agency, that the relative
be evaluated by the county child welfare agency and a
recommendation be made to the court as to whether the relative
should or should not be considered for placement.

SEC. 2.  

Section 358 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is
amended to read:

358.  

(a) After finding that a child is a person described in
Section 300, the court shall hear evidence on the question of the
proper disposition to be made of the child. Prior to making a
finding required by this section, the court may continue the hearing
on its own motion, the motion of the parent or guardian, or the
motion of the child, as follows:

(1) If the child is detained during the continuance, and the social
worker is not alleging that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 is
applicable, the continuance shall not exceed 10 judicial days. The
court may make an order for detention of the child or for the child’s
release from detention, during the period of continuance, as is
appropriate.

(2) If the child is not detained during the continuance, the
continuance shall not exceed 30 days after the date of the finding
pursuant to Section 356. However, the court may, for cause,
continue the hearing for an additional 15 days.

(3) If the social worker is alleging that subdivision (b) of Section
361.5 is applicable, the court shall continue the proceedings for a
period not to exceed 30 days. The social worker shall notify each
parent of the content of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 and shall
inform each parent that if the court does not order reunification a
permanency planning hearing will be held, and that his or her
parental rights may be terminated within the timeframes specified
by law.

(b) Before determining the appropriate disposition, the court
shall receive in evidence the social study of the child made by the
social worker, any study or evaluation made by a child advocate
appointed by the court, and other relevant and material evidence
as may be offered, including, but not limited to, the willingness
of the caregiver to provide legal permanency for the child if
reunification is unsuccessful. In any judgment and order of
disposition, the court shall specifically state that the social study
made by the social worker and the study or evaluation made by
the child advocate appointed by the court, if there be any, has been
read and considered by the court in arriving at its judgment and
order of disposition. Any social study or report submitted to the
court by the social worker shall include the individual child’s case
plan developed pursuant to Section 16501.1.

(1)  begin delete If the end delete begin insert Whenever a end insert child is removed from begin delete the end delete begin insert a end insert parent’s or
guardian’s custody, the court shall begin delete consider whether end delete begin insert make a finding
as to whether end insert the social worker has exercised due diligence in
conducting the begin delete investigation end delete begin insert investigation, as required pursuant
to paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 309, end insert to identify,
locate, and notify the child’s begin delete relatives. end delete begin insert relatives, including both
maternal and paternal relatives. end insert

(2) When making the determination required pursuant to
paragraph (1), the court may consider, among other examples of
due diligence, begin delete whether end delete begin insert the extent to which end insert the social worker has
begin insert complied with paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 309, and
has end insert done any of the following:

(A) Asked the child, in an age-appropriate manner and consistent
with the child’s best interest, about his or her relatives.

(B) Obtained information regarding the location of the child’s
relatives.

(C) Reviewed the child’s case file for any information regarding
the child’s relatives.

(D) Telephoned, emailed, or visited all identified relatives.

(E) Asked located relatives for the names and locations of other
relatives.

(F) Used Internet search tools to locate relatives identified as
supports.

begin delete

(3) The court shall continue the disposition hearing if the court
finds that the social worker has failed to exercise due diligence in
finding the child’s relatives to allow time for due diligence to be
exercised.

end delete

(c) If the court finds that a child is described by subdivision (h)
of Section 300 or that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 may be
applicable, the court shall conduct the dispositional proceeding
pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 361.5.

SEC. 3.  

Section 361.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is
amended to read:

361.3.  

(a) In any case in which a child is removed from the
physical custody of his or her parents pursuant to Section 361,
preferential consideration shall be given to a request by a relative
of the child for placement of the child with the relative, regardless
of the relative’s immigration status. In determining whether
placement with a relative is appropriate, the county social worker
and court shall consider, but shall not be limited to, consideration
of all the following factors:

(1) The best interest of the child, including special physical,
psychological, educational, medical, or emotional needs.

(2) The wishes of the parent, the relative, and child, if
appropriate.

(3) The provisions of Part 6 (commencing with Section 7950)
of Division 12 of the Family Code regarding relative placement.

(4) Placement of siblings and half siblings in the same home,
unless that placement is found to be contrary to the safety and
well-being of any of the siblings, as provided in Section 16002.

(5) The good moral character of the relative and any other adult
living in the home, including whether any individual residing in
the home has a prior history of violent criminal acts or has been
responsible for acts of child abuse or neglect.

(6) The nature and duration of the relationship between the child
and the relative, and the relative’s desire to care for, and to provide
legal permanency for, the child if reunification is unsuccessful.

(7) The ability of the relative to do the following:

(A) Provide a safe, secure, and stable environment for the child.

(B) Exercise proper and effective care and control of the child.

(C) Provide a home and the necessities of life for the child.

(D) Protect the child from his or her parents.

(E) Facilitate court-ordered reunification efforts with the parents.

(F) Facilitate visitation with the child’s other relatives.

(G) Facilitate implementation of all elements of the case plan.

(H) Provide legal permanence for the child if reunification fails.

However, any finding made with respect to the factor considered
pursuant to this subparagraph and pursuant to subparagraph (G)
shall not be the sole basis for precluding preferential placement
with a relative.

(I) Arrange for appropriate and safe child care, as necessary.

(8) The safety of the relative’s home. For a relative to be
considered appropriate to receive placement of a child under this
section, the relative’s home shall first be approved pursuant to the
process and standards described in subdivision (d) of Section 309.

In this regard, the Legislature declares that a physical disability,
such as blindness or deafness, is no bar to the raising of children,
and a county social worker’s determination as to the ability of a
disabled relative to exercise care and control should center upon
whether the relative’s disability prevents him or her from exercising
care and control. The court shall order the parent to disclose to the
county social worker the names, residences, and any other known
identifying information of any maternal or paternal relatives of
the child. This inquiry shall not be construed, however, to guarantee
that the child will be placed with any person so identified. The
county social worker shall initially contact the relatives given
preferential consideration for placement to determine if they desire
the child to be placed with them. Those desiring placement shall
be assessed according to the factors enumerated in this subdivision.
The county social worker shall document these efforts in the social
study prepared pursuant to Section 358.1. The court shall authorize
the county social worker, while assessing these relatives for the
possibility of placement, to disclose to the relative, as appropriate,
the fact that the child is in custody, the alleged reasons for the
custody, and the projected likely date for the child’s return home
or placement for adoption or legal guardianship. However, this
investigation shall not be construed as good cause for continuance
of the dispositional hearing conducted pursuant to Section 358.

(b) In any case in which more than one appropriate relative
requests preferential consideration pursuant to this section, each
relative shall be considered under the factors enumerated in
subdivision (a). Consistent with the legislative intent for children
to be placed immediately with a responsible relative, this section
does not limit the county social worker’s ability to place a child
in the home of an appropriate relative or a nonrelative extended
family member pending the consideration of other relatives who
have requested preferential consideration.

(c) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Preferential consideration” means that the relative seeking
placement shall be the first placement to be considered and
investigated.

(2) “Relative” means an adult who is related to the child by
blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship,
including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status
is preceded by the words “great,” “great-great,” or “grand,” or the
spouse of any of these persons even if the marriage was terminated
by death or dissolution. However, only the following relatives
shall be given preferential consideration for the placement of the
child: an adult who is a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling.

(d) Subsequent to the hearing conducted pursuant to Section
358, consideration for placement shall be given as described in
this section to relatives who have not been found to be unsuitable
and who will fulfill the child’s reunification or permanent plan
requirements. In addition to the factors described in subdivision
(a), the county social worker shall consider whether the relative
has established and maintained a relationship with the child.

(e) If the court does not place the child with a relative who has
been considered for placement pursuant to this section, the court
shall state for the record the reasons placement with that relative
was denied.

(f) (1) With respect to a child who satisfies the criteria set forth
in paragraph (2), the department and any licensed adoption agency
may search for a relative and furnish identifying information
relating to the child to that relative if it is believed the child’s
welfare will be promoted thereby.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply if both of the following conditions
are satisfied:

(A) The child was previously a dependent of the court.

(B) The child was previously adopted and the adoption has been
disrupted, set aside pursuant to Section 9100 or 9102 of the Family
Code, or the child has been released into the custody of the
department or a licensed adoption agency by the adoptive parent
or parents.

(3) As used in this subdivision, “relative” includes a member
of the child’s birth family and nonrelated extended family
members, regardless of whether the parental rights were terminated,
provided that both of the following are true:

(A) No appropriate potential caretaker is known to exist from
the child’s adoptive family, including nonrelated extended family
members of the adoptive family.

(B) The child was not the subject of a voluntary relinquishment
by the birth parents pursuant to Section 8700 of the Family Code
or Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code.