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 placementbegin insert againend insert be given tobegin delete relatives, as specified.end deletebegin insert relatives whenever a new placement of the child must be made. Existing case law generally provides that the relative placement preference applies throughout the reunification period, and that a social worker is required to make an assessment of a relative who requests to be considered for placement at any time during that period.end insert
This bill would require the juvenile court to make a finding as to 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 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.end deletebegin insert The bill would codify procedures that apply under existing law, as interpreted by case law, whenever a relative identifies himself or herself to the county during the reunification period for purposes of placement with that relative and the making of the assessment by the county, as specified.end insert
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
It is the intent of the Legislature in amending
2Section 361.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to clarify, if a
3child is receiving reunification services and a relative identifies
4himself or herself to a county child welfare agency, that the relative
5be evaluated by the county child welfare agency and a
6recommendation be made to the court as to whether the relative
7should or should not be considered for placement.
Section 358 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is
9amended to read:
(a) After finding that a child is a person described in
11Section 300, the court shall hear evidence on the question of the
12proper disposition to be made of the child. Prior to making a
13finding required by this section, the court may continue the hearing
14on its own motion, the motion of the parent or guardian, or the
15motion of the child, as follows:
16(1) If the child is detained during the continuance, and the social
17worker is not alleging that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 is
18applicable, the continuance shall not exceed 10 judicial days. The
P3 1court may make an order for detention of the child or for the child’s
2release from detention, during the period of continuance, as is
3appropriate.
4(2) If the child is not detained during the continuance, the
5continuance shall not exceed 30 days after the date of the finding
6pursuant to Section 356. However, the court may, for cause,
7continue the hearing for an additional 15 days.
8(3) If the social worker is alleging that subdivision (b) of Section
9361.5 is applicable, the court shall continue the proceedings for a
10period not to exceed 30 days. The social worker shall notify each
11parent of the content of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 and shall
12inform each parent that if the court does not order reunification a
13permanency planning hearing will be held, and that his or her
14parental rights may be terminated within the timeframes specified
15by law.
16(b) begin insert(1)end insertbegin insert end insert Before determining the appropriate disposition, the
17court shall receive in evidence the social study of the child made
18by the social worker, any study or evaluation made by a child
19advocate appointed by the court, and other relevant and material
20evidence as may be offered, including, but not limited to, the
21willingness of the caregiver to provide legal permanency for the
22child if reunification is unsuccessful. In any judgment and order
23of disposition, the court shall specifically state that the social study
24made by the social worker and the study or evaluation made by
25the child advocate appointed by the court, if there be any, has been
26read and considered by the court in arriving at its judgment and
27order of disposition. Any social study or report submitted to the
28court by the social worker shall include the individual child’s case
29plan developed pursuant to Section 16501.1.
30(1)
end delete
31begin insert(2)end insert Whenever a child is removed from a parent’s or guardian’s
32custody, the court shall make a finding as to whether the social
33worker has exercised due diligence in conducting the investigation,
34as required pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section
35309, to identify, locate, and notify the child’s relatives, including
36both maternal and paternal relatives.
37(2)
end delete
38begin insert(3)end insert When making the determination required pursuant to
39paragraphbegin delete (1),end deletebegin insert
(2),end insert the court may consider, among other examples
40of due diligence, the extent to which the social worker has complied
P4 1with paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 309, and has done
2any of the following:
3(A) Asked the child, in an age-appropriate manner and consistent
4with the child’s best interest, about his or her relatives.
5(B) Obtained information regarding the location of the child’s
6relatives.
7(C) Reviewed the child’s case file for any information regarding
8the child’s relatives.
9(D) Telephoned, emailed, or visited all identified relatives.
10(E) Asked located relatives for the names and locations of other
11relatives.
12(F) Used Internet search tools to locate relatives identified as
13supports.
14(c) If the court finds that a child is described by subdivision (h)
15of Section 300 or that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 may be
16applicable, the court shall conduct the dispositional proceeding
17pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 361.5.
Section 361.3 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is
19amended to read:
(a) In any case in which a child is removed from the
21physical custody of his or her parents pursuant to Section 361,
22preferential consideration shall be given to a request by a relative
23of the child for placement of the child with the relative, regardless
24of the relative’s immigration status. In determining whether
25placement with a relative is appropriate, the county social worker
26and court shall consider, but shall not be limited to, consideration
27of all the following factors:
28(1) The best interest of the child, including special physical,
29psychological, educational, medical, or emotional needs.
30(2) The wishes of the parent, the relative, and child, if
31appropriate.
32(3) The provisions of Part 6 (commencing with Section 7950)
33of Division 12 of the Family Code regarding relative placement.
34(4) Placement of siblings and half siblings in the same home,
35unless that placement is found to be contrary to the safety and
36well-being of any of the siblings, as provided in Section 16002.
37(5) The good moral character of the relative and any other adult
38living in the home, including whether any individual residing in
39the home has a prior history of violent criminal acts or has been
40responsible for acts of child abuse or neglect.
P5 1(6) The nature and duration of the relationship between the child
2and the relative, and the relative’s desire to care for, and to provide
3legal permanency for, the child if reunification is unsuccessful.
4(7) The ability of the relative to do the following:
5(A) Provide a safe, secure, and stable environment for the child.
6(B) Exercise proper and effective care and control of the child.
7(C) Provide a home and the necessities of life for the child.
8(D) Protect the child from his or her parents.
9(E) Facilitate court-ordered reunification efforts with the parents.
10(F) Facilitate visitation with the child’s other relatives.
11(G) Facilitate implementation of all elements of the case plan.
12(H) Provide legal permanence for the child if reunification fails.
13However, any finding made with respect to the factor considered
14pursuant to this subparagraph and pursuant to subparagraph (G)
15shall not be the sole basis for precluding preferential placement
16with a relative.
17(I) Arrange for appropriate and safe child care, as necessary.
18(8) The safety of the relative’s home. For a relative to be
19considered appropriate to receive placement of a child under this
20section, the relative’s home shall first be approved pursuant to the
21process and standards described in subdivision (d) of Section 309.
22In this regard, the Legislature declares that a physical disability,
23such as blindness or deafness, is no bar to the raising of children,
24and a
county social worker’s determination as to the ability of a
25disabled relative to exercise care and control should center upon
26whether the relative’s disability prevents him or her from exercising
27care and control. The court shall order the parent to disclose to the
28county social worker the names, residences, and any other known
29identifying information of any maternal or paternal relatives of
30the child. This inquiry shall not be construed, however, to guarantee
31that the child will be placed with any person so identified. The
32county social worker shall initially contact the relatives given
33preferential consideration for placement to determine if they desire
34the child to be placed with them. Those desiring placement shall
35be assessed according to the factors enumerated in this subdivision.
36The county social worker shall document these efforts in the social
37study prepared pursuant to Section 358.1. The court shall authorize
38the county social worker, while assessing these relatives for the
39possibility of
placement, to disclose to the relative, as appropriate,
40the fact that the child is in custody, the alleged reasons for the
P6 1custody, and the projected likely date for the child’s return home
2or placement for adoption or legal guardianship. However, this
3investigation shall not be construed as good cause for continuance
4of the dispositional hearing conducted pursuant to Section 358.
5(b) In any case in which more than one appropriate relative
6requests preferential consideration pursuant to this section, each
7relative shall be considered under the factors enumerated in
8subdivision (a). Consistent with the legislative intent for children
9to be placed immediately with a responsible relative, this section
10does not limit the county social worker’s ability to place a child
11in the home of an appropriate relative or a nonrelative extended
12family member pending the consideration of other relatives who
13have requested preferential consideration.
14(c) For purposes of this section:
15(1) “Preferential consideration” means that the relative seeking
16placement shall be the first placement to be considered and
17investigated.
18(2) “Relative” means an adult who is related to the child by
19blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship,
20including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status
21is preceded by the words “great,” “great-great,” or “grand,” or the
22spouse of any of these persons even if the marriage was terminated
23by death or dissolution. However, only the following relatives
24shall be given preferential consideration for the placement of the
25child: an adult who is a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling.
26(d) begin insert(1)end insertbegin insert end insert Subsequent to the hearing conducted pursuant to Section
27358,begin insert whenever a new placement of the child must be made,end insert
28
consideration for placement shallbegin insert againend insert be given as described in
29this section to relatives who have not been found to be unsuitable
30and who will fulfill the child’s reunification or permanent plan
31requirements. In addition to the factors described in subdivision
32(a), the county social worker shall consider whether the relative
33has established and maintained a relationship with the child.
34
(2) (A) Whenever a relative identifies himself or herself to the
35county subsequent to the hearing conducted pursuant to Section
36358 and during the provision of reunification services, and the
37county is not otherwise considering a change of placement, the
38county shall, within 14 calendar days, determine whether the
39relative may meet the
best interests of the child and should
P7 1therefore be assessed and considered for placement according to
2the factors described in subdivision (a).
3
(B) Within three days of determining whether to assess and
4consider the relative for placement, the county shall inform the
5court, the relative, and the parties to the case of its decision,
6including the reasons for the decision.
7
(C) If the county does not assess the relative for placement, at
8the request of a
party to the case or on its own motion, the court
9shall set the matter for hearing and may order the agency to assess
10the relative and recommend to the court whether the child should
11be placed with the relative.
12
(D) Notwithstanding Section 388, a relative may request a
13hearing before the court if the county decided not to assess the
14relative for placement. The court may set the matter for hearing
15and may order the agency to assess the relative and recommend
16to the court whether the child should be placed with the relative.
17If the court does not set the matter for hearing, the court shall state
18its reasons on the record.
19(e) If the court does
not place the child with a relative who has
20been considered for placement pursuant to this section, the court
21shall state for the record the reasons placement with that relative
22was denied.
23(f) (1) With respect to a child who satisfies the criteria set forth
24in paragraph (2), the department and any licensed adoption agency
25may search for a relative and furnish identifying information
26relating to the child to that relative if it is believed the child’s
27welfare will be promoted thereby.
28(2) Paragraph (1) shall apply if both of the following conditions
29are satisfied:
30(A) The child was previously a dependent of the court.
31(B) The child was previously adopted and the adoption has been
32disrupted, set aside pursuant to Section 9100 or
9102 of the Family
33Code, or the child has been released into the custody of the
34department or a licensed adoption agency by the adoptive parent
35or parents.
36(3) As used in this subdivision, “relative” includes a member
37of the child’s birth family and nonrelated extended family
38members, regardless of whether the parental rights were terminated,
39provided that both of the following are true:
P8 1(A) No appropriate potential caretaker is known to exist from
2the child’s adoptive family, including nonrelated extended family
3members of the adoptive family.
4(B) The child was not the subject of a voluntary relinquishment
5by the birth parents pursuant to Section 8700 of the Family Code
6or Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code.
CORRECTIONS:
Text--Pages 2 and 8.
O
Corrected 7-13-16—See last page. 96