BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 977
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 977 (Liu)
As Amended June 16, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :29-5
JUDICIARY 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Garcia, Maienschein, | |Calderon, Campos, |
| |Muratsuchi, Stone | |Donnelly, Eggman, Gomez, |
| | | |Holden, Jones, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Lowenthal |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires the court to consider placement of a
dependent child with a parent who is enrolled in a substance
abuse treatment facility. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the court to consider, at the detention,
dispositional, and review hearings, whether a child can be
returned to the custody of his or her parent who is enrolled
in a certified substance abuse treatment facility that allows
a dependent child to reside with his or her parent.
2)Provides that the fact that the parent is enrolled in a
substance abuse treatment facility shall not, for that reason
alone, be prima facie evidence of substantial danger, and
requires the court to specify the factual basis for its
conclusion that return of the child to the parent would or
would not pose a substantial danger to the physical health,
safety, protection, or physical or emotional well-being of the
child.
3)Expands the information social workers are required to include
in each study, evaluation or supplemental report to the court
to include a factual discussion of whether the child can be
SB 977
Page 2
returned to the custody of his or her parent who is enrolled
in a certified substance abuse treatment facility that allows
the dependent child to reside with his or her parent.
4)Specifies that treatment services under the Promoting Safe and
Stable Families Program may include treatment at a residential
substance abuse treatment facility that accepts families.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that a child can be made a dependent of the juvenile
court when he or she has suffered, or is at a substantial risk
of suffering, serious abuse or neglect, including by the
inability of the parent or guardian to provide regular care
for the child due to the parent's or guardian's substance
abuse.
2)Requires the court, at the initial petition hearing to
determine whether the child should be further detained, to
determine whether reasonable efforts were made to prevent the
removal of the child and whether there are available services
that would prevent the need for further detention.
3)Provides that a child shall not be taken from the physical
custody of the parent or guardian unless the court finds clear
and convincing evidence of a substantial danger to the child,
and that there are no reasonable means to protect the child.
Provides that the court may limit parental control over a
dependent child, but that such limitations may not exceed
those necessary to protect the child.
4)Provides that the court shall order the county to provide
child welfare services, except as specified, to the child and
the child's parents or guardians, and permits the court to
order the parent or guardian to participate in counseling or
other treatment services. Provides that the services are not
required to be provided if the court finds that the parent or
guardian has a history of extensive drug or alcohol use and
has resisted prior treatment, as specified.
5)Requires the court, at the review hearing, to order a
dependent child returned to the custody of his or her parents
unless the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence,
that returning the child would create a substantial risk of
SB 977
Page 3
harm to the child.
6)Authorizes the court to continue the permanency hearing for up
to six months if there is a substantial probability that the
child will be returned to the physical custody of the parent
or guardian within the extended time.
7)Authorizes the court to continue the permanency hearing for up
to six months if the court determines by clear and convincing
evidence that the best interests of the child would be met
through additional reunification services to a parent making
substantial progress in a court-ordered residential substance
abuse treatment program.
8)Encourages the continuity of families and provides family
preservation services to families who are at risk of removal
of their children for out-of-home placement.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Potential costs of approximately $75,000 (General Fund) for
every 5% of dependent youth that require additional county
social worker time to include a factual discussion in social
studies, evaluations, and supplemental reports to the courts.
It is unknown how many cases would be impacted under the
provisions of this bill, but for every 2,000 cases (less than
5% of dependent children) that require a social worker to
spend an additional 30 minutes, annual costs would be about
$75,000 statewide.
2)Unknown, potential future cost savings in reduced time spent
in dependent care to the extent youth are returned to the
custody of their parents sooner than otherwise would occur
under existing law.
3)Proposition 30, passed by the voters in November 2012, among
other provisions, eliminated potential mandate funding
liability for any new program or higher level of service
provided by counties related to the realigned programs.
Although the provisions of this bill are a mandate on local
agencies, any increased costs would not appear to be subject
to reimbursement by the state.
SB 977
Page 4
COMMENTS : The objectives of the juvenile dependency system are
to ensure children's safety and protection, and where possible,
preserve and strengthen families. If children can be maintained
safely with their parents, that is the first preference, often
with supportive services provided to the parents. In the event
that a child cannot be returned to the parent, he or she can be
placed with a relative or an extended non-relative family
member, in a foster family home or even in a group home. This
bill seeks to ensure that, if the parent is placed in a
residential substance abuse treatment facility that allows
children to reside with their parents, the juvenile court
considers whether or not to release the child into the custody
of that parent.
There is a significant correlation between substance abuse and
the child welfare system. According to the Department of Health
Care Services (DHCS), approximately 40% of clients receiving
drug or alcohol treatment are women and 61% of those women have
minor children. California provides a number of resources for
individuals who struggle with drug or alcohol abuse. DHCS
licenses residential facilities that provide non-medical
services to adults who are working to overcome substance abuse
problems, including education sessions, recovery or treatment
planning, and detoxification services. Many facilities offer
individualized services, which can include vocational or new
skills training, and some of the facilities allow dependent
children to reside with their parents. Studies have shown that
women in residential treatment programs that provide live-in
accommodations for children have higher completion rates and
better outcomes.
This bill first requires that social workers consider, in the
report to the court, whether a child may be returned to the
custody of his or her parent who is enrolled in a facility that
allows the child to reside with his or her parent. This ensures
that the social worker not only considers such placement, but
provides the court with sufficient information for its review.
The bill then requires that the court consider whether such a
placement is appropriate and provides that the fact that a
parent is enrolled in a certified substance abuse treatment
facility is not, in and of itself, evidence of substantial
danger or detriment to the child. This allows the court to
refuse to place the child with the parent, but requires that the
SB 977
Page 5
court not do so simply because it is a substance abuse treatment
facility.
While there is no prohibition in existing law preventing placing
children with parents in facilities, and in fact, parents who do
not participate in court ordered treatment programs run the risk
of having reunification denied, the author is concerned that
social workers and courts may not fully consider such
placements. Given the existing policy which emphasizes
reunification with parents and the preservation of the family,
and the fact that some facilities may allow children to reside
with parents seeking treatment, this bill simply requires courts
to consider such placements.
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334
FN:
0004214