BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 218|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 218
          Author:   Scott (D)
          Amended:  4/21/05
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE  :  6-0, 4/12/05
          AYES:  Dunn, Morrow, Ackerman, Cedillo, Figueroa, Kuehl
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Escutia

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  9-0, 5/16/05
          AYES:  Migden, Aanestad, Alquist, Ashburn, Bowen, Dutton,  
            Florez, Murray, Poochigian
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Battin, Escutia, Ortiz, Speier


           SUBJECT  :    Post-termination of parental rights:  removal  
          from caretaker

           SOURCE  :     Los Angeles Affiliate of the National  
          Association of Counsel 
                      for Children


           DIGEST  :    This bill provides that after termination of  
          parental rights and before a petition for adoption is  
          granted by the court, a child may be removed from the home  
          of a caretaker who has been designated as a prospective  
          adoptive parent only after notice is provided and, if a  
          noticed person objects, a noticed hearing is held.  The  
          child may be removed from that caretaker's home if the  
          court finds that removal is in the best interest of the  
          child.  This bill provides that the above notice and  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 218
                                                                Page  
          2

          noticed hearing procedure does not apply if there is a risk  
          of physical or emotional harm to the child.  In that event,  
          the Department of Social Services or the licensed adoption  
          agency may remove the child immediately and then proceed  
          with the noticed hearing procedure.  This bill provides  
          that a court may designate a dependent child's caretaker as  
          a prospective adoptive parent if specified conditions are  
          met and the caretaker has taken steps towards the goal of  
          adopting the child.

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law provides that if the court  
          declares a child free from the custody and control of both  
          parents or one parent if the other parent does not have  
          custody and control, the court shall at the same time order  
          the child referred to the Department of Social Services  
          (DSS) or a licensed adoption agency for adoptive placement.  


          Existing law makes DSS or a licensed adoption agency  
          responsible for the custody and supervision of the child  
          and thus entitles them to the exclusive care and control of  
          the child at all times until a petition for adoption is  
          granted.

          This bill, for the period between termination of parental  
          rights and the granting of a petition for adoption,  
          establishes a procedure for the removal of a dependent  
          child from the home of a caretaker who is a designated  
          prospective adoptive parent.  It requires DSS or local  
          agency to provide notice prior to removal of the child.  

          This bill provides that the child, child's attorney, or the  
          designated prospective adoptive parent may petition the  
          court for a hearing, or the court on its own motion may set  
          a hearing, on the proposed removal of the child.  At the  
          hearing, the court will determine whether it is in the best  
          interest of the child to remove that child from the  
          caretaker's home.  If no objection is filed or hearing set  
          within five court days or seven calendar days after notice  
          of the proposed removal, whichever is longer, the child may  
          be removed.  The court may, for good cause, extend the  
          filing period.

          This bill, however, provides that no notice will be  







                                                                SB 218
                                                                Page  
          3

          required prior to removal of the child from the home of a  
          caretaker, if there is a risk of physical or emotional harm  
          to the child if the child continues to reside with the  
          caretaker.  A hearing will then be held five court days or  
          seven calendar days pursuant to the procedure established  
          by the bill.
          
          Existing law does not provide for a caretaker of a  
          dependent child to petition the court at any dependency  
          proceeding after termination of parental rights for a  
          designation as a prospective adoptive parent.  Existing law  
          does not confer on a dependent child's caretaker standing  
          to petition the court for a hearing if the caretaker  
          objects to the removal of a dependent child from the  
          caretaker's home.

          This bill permits the court, at the hearing to terminate  
          parental rights to a dependent child or at anytime  
          thereafter, to designate as a prospective adoptive parent a  
          caretaker with whom the dependent child has lived for at  
          least six months, who has expressed a commitment to adopt  
          the child, and who has taken at least one step to  
          facilitate the adoption process.

          This bill provides several examples of "steps" that a  
          caretaker may take to satisfy the third requirement for  
          designation as a prospective adoptive parent.  

          This bill confers on a caretaker who is a designated  
          prospective adoptive parent standing to petition the court  
          for a hearing on whether it is in the best interest of a  
          child to remove that child from the caretaker's home after  
          termination of parental rights and before a petition for  
          adoption is granted.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

                          Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

            Major Provisions       2005-06     2006-07     2007-08     Fund  








                                                                SB 218
                                                                Page  
          4

           DSS                  Probably not substantial  
           costsGeneral/
                                                               
           Federal

           Child welfare agencies         Probably under $150  
           annually             General/
                                                               
           Federal/
                                                              Local

           Courts               Probably not substantial  
           costsGeneral

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  5/17/05)

          Los Angeles Affiliate of the National Association of  
            Counsel for Children (source)
          Academy of California Adoption Lawyers
          Children's Law Center of Los Angeles
          Family Law Section of the State Bar of California
          National Center for Youth Law
          State Public Affairs Committee of the Junior Leagues of  
            California

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  5/17/05)

          California Association of Adoption Agencies
          California State Association of Counties
          California Welfare Directors Association
          Service Employees International Union

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    The author and the sponsor of the  
          bill, the Los Angeles Affiliate of the National Association  
          for Counsel of Children, believe that existing law does not  
          protect the stability of children post-termination of  
          parental rights, because the court's oversight function  
          essentially evaporates between the order to place the child  
          for adoption and the order granting the petition for  
          adoption.  Current law gives the DSS and the licensed  
          adoption agency unfettered authority during this time  
          period to remove a child from a caretaker's home, they  
          state, without the safeguard of the court reviewing the  
          decision.  This is contrary to "the collaborative  







                                                                SB 218
                                                                Page  
          5

          decision-making process that occurs earlier in dependency  
          proceedings," they assert, where the best interest of the  
          child is protected at all times.

          The sponsor contends that children who have lived for long  
          periods of time with their caretakers could be  
          psychologically harmed by being moved to a different home  
          pending a petition for adoption.  Their proposed solution  
          is to require that when the DSS or the licensed adoption  
          agency recommends that a child be removed from a caretaker  
          who wishes to adopt the child, only to be adopted by a  
          different person, that recommendation should be reviewed by  
          the dependency court.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The California State  
          Association of Counties (CSAC) writes:
           
             "Unfortunately, recent amendments taken in the Senate  
            Judiciary Committee raise substantial fiscal concerns  
            for counties.  As amended in committee, the bill now  
            allows a caretaker who met the criteria as of the date  
            that notice was given of a planned placement change for  
            the child to both ask for a hearing and petition to be  
            named the prospective adoptive parent at the same time.  
            The noticing provisions also were amended to require  
            the adoption agency to give notice of a planned move  
            not only to a caretaker who has already been designated  
            a prospective adoptive parent, but also a caretaker who  
            might meet the criteria as of the date of notice. 

            "In effect, this provision will require automatic  
            notice to all caretakers when a placement change is  
            planned, just in case the caretaker meets the criteria  
            set forth in the bill. Failure to provide notice to a  
            caretaker who met the criteria - but had not yet asked  
            be named a prospective adoptive parent - could result  
            in the reversal of placement decisions made by an  
            adoption agency and/or findings made by a court.

            "Counties are concerned about the new costs associated  
            with this noticing requirement, including costs for the  
            notice process itself and costs due to potential delays  
            in the adoptions process. County adoptions workers work  
            hard to follow all state and federal laws and rules of  







                                                                SB 218
                                                                Page  
          6

            the court, but their already high caseloads make new  
            requirements such as this very difficult to implement.  
            The broad nature of this new rule would make delays  
            much more likely, exacerbating the already long  
            adoption process and delaying permanency for children  
            in our foster care system.

            "In order to address our fiscal concerns, CSAC is  
            asking for the same amendments that were submitted by  
            the County Welfare Directors Association (CWDA):  that  
            the bill be amended to require notice only to  
            caretakers who have already been named a prospective  
            adoptive parent as of the notice date for the planned  
            placement move, and to provide for hearing requests  
            only by caretakers who already have been named  
            prospective adoptive parents. 

            "Even with these amendments, the bill still would  
            provide far greater caretaker involvement in adoptive  
            placement decisions than under current statute or  
            practice. Further, it is not unreasonable to expect  
            that a caretaker who wants to become the permanent  
            adoptive parent for a child should have already applied  
            for this designation at an appropriate time in the  
            process."


          RJG:mel  5/18/05   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****