BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1099
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 24, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Bob Wieckowski, Chair
SB 1099 (Steinberg) - As Amended: April 29, 2014
PROPOSED CONSENT
SENATE VOTE : 35-0
SUBJECT : DEPENDENT CHILDREN: sIBLING VISITATION
KEY ISSUE : GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE OF SIBLING RELATIONSHIPS FOR
CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE, SHOULD ADDITIONAL EFFORTS BE MADE TO
FACILITATE SIBLING VISITATION?
SYNOPSIS
The bond between siblings, especially those in foster care,
cannot be underestimated. In 2008, Congress passed the
Fostering Connections to Success and Increasing Adoptions Act,
which, among other things, made it a priority that siblings
entering the foster care system be placed together by requiring
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, the Act requires that
visitation between them must occur frequently, unless the
visitation is contrary to their safety or well-being.
This non-controversial bill, sponsored by the California Youth
Connection, requires social workers to include specified details
related to sibling visitation in their reports, and requires
courts to make a renewed finding that sibling interaction is
contrary to the safety or well-being of either child when
renewing any suspension of sibling interaction. This bill also
authorizes a dependent child to request visitation with a
sibling who is in the physical custody of a common parent, as
specified, and authorizes the court to grant such a request
unless it is determined by the court that visitation is contrary
to the safety and well-being of either of the siblings.
This bill is supported by, among others, children's advocates,
the county welfare directors and the juvenile court judges. It
has no known opposition.
SB 1099
Page 2
SUMMARY : Encourages visitation with siblings for children in
the dependency system. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires a dependent child's social worker to include certain
information in his or her report to the court, for the
disposition hearing and thereafter, in situations where
siblings are not placed together, and requires the court to
consider that information at the periodic review hearings,
including:
a) The frequency and nature of visits between siblings;
b) Whether visits are supervised, and if so, why, and what
needs to be accomplished in order to have unsupervised
visits; and
c) Any plan to increase visitation between siblings.
2)Provides that it is the intent of the Legislature to preserve
and strengthen a dependent child's sibling relationship with a
nondependent sibling who remains in the custody of a mutual
parent subject to the court's jurisdiction, and that the court
has the authority to develop a sibling visitation plan, as
specified.
3)Allows a dependent child or nonminor dependent to petition the
court for visitation with a nondependent sibling who is in the
custody of a common legal or biological parent. Allows the
court to grant visitation with that sibling unless the court
determines that such visitation is contrary to the safety and
well-being of any of the siblings.
4)Requires that in order for a suspension of sibling interaction
to continue after periodic review hearings, the court must
make a renewed finding that sibling interaction is contrary to
the safety or well-being of either child.
5)Allows a dependent child or nonminor dependent to petition the
court for visitation with a nondependent sibling. Allows the
court to appoint a guardian ad litem to file the petition for
the child. Provides that the court may grant a request for
sibling visitation unless it is determined by the court that
sibling visitation is contrary to the safety and well-being of
any of the siblings.
EXISTING LAW :
SB 1099
Page 3
1)Allows a juvenile court to adjudicate a minor a dependent of
the court if the child has been neglected or abused. (Welfare
& Institutions Code Section 300. Unless stated otherwise, all
further statutory references are to that code.)
2)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. Section
671(a).)
3)States the intent of the Legislature to ensure that siblings
who are removed from home will be placed in foster care
together, unless the placement is contrary to the safety or
well-being of any sibling. Requires the child welfare agency
to make diligent efforts to maintain sibling relationships in
all out-of-home placements of dependent children, and, if
siblings are not placed together in the same home, the social
worker must explain why, what efforts are being made to place
them together in the same home, or alternatively why those
efforts are not appropriate. (Section 16002.)
4)Requires, when the court has ordered removal of a child from
the physical custody of a parent, that the court consider
whether there are any siblings under the court's jurisdiction,
and the appropriateness of maintaining those sibling
relationships. (Section 361.2.)
5)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. (Section 362.1.)
6)Requires, when the court has ordered the removal of a child
from his or her parents, to consider whether there are
siblings also under the court's jurisdiction, the nature of
the relationships between the siblings and the appropriateness
of developing or maintaining those relationships, and the
impact of those relationships on placement and permanency
planning. (Section 366.3(e)(9).)
7)Requires a social worker, where possible and appropriate, to
SB 1099
Page 4
place a child, who has been removed from his or her parents or
guardian because of abuse or neglect, together with his or her
siblings or half-siblings also being removed, or to describe
continuing efforts to place them together if they are not
initially placed together, or to explain why placing them
together is inappropriate. (Section 306.5.)
8)Requires reports submitted into evidence and prepared by
social workers or child advocates for dispositional hearings
to include factual discussions regarding a variety of subjects
including the nature of sibling relationships and status of
sibling visitation. (Section 358.1.)
9)Allows any person to petition the juvenile court to assert a
sibling relationship by blood, adoption, or through affinity
with a legal or biological parent with a child who is a
dependent of the juvenile court, and to request visitation
with that child. (Section 388.)
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS : In 2008, Congress passed the Fostering Connections to
Success and Increasing Adoptions Act (Act), which, among other
things, made it a priority that siblings entering the foster
care system be placed together by requiring 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, the Act requires that
visitation between them must occur frequently, unless the
visitation is contrary to their safety or well-being.
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 (Steinberg),
Chap. 805, Stats. 1999.) Since then, California has enacted
several additional statutes to expand legal protections for
sibling relationships. These laws have served to promote
sibling relationships when both children are in the dependency
system, but recent, unpublished cases indicate that courts will
not grant visitation in the rare case where one sibling is in
the foster system and the other remains in the legal custody of
the parent.
This bill seeks to address this situation by giving dependency
courts the authority to order visitation between dependent and
SB 1099
Page 5
non-dependent siblings in specified circumstances.
Additionally, this bill updates existing sibling visitation
statutes, such as requiring more detailed information in social
worker reports, to better encourage visits between siblings.
California Law has Long Recognized the Importance of Maintaining
Sibling Relationships : California law has repeatedly recognized
the importance of maintaining and developing sibling
relationships for children in foster care. Key legislation in
this area includes AB 743 (Portantino), Chap. 560, Stat. 2010,
which required greater notice if siblings are to be separated;
AB 705 (Steinberg), Chap. 747, Stats. 2001, which ensured that
sibling relationships are considered at all appropriate hearings
and siblings are placed together when appropriate; AB 1987
(Steinberg), Chap. 909, Stats. 2000, which recognized the
importance of sibling relationships and required the court to
consider the existence, nature and impact of a dependent child's
sibling relationships on the child's placement and planning for
legal permanence; and AB 740 (Steinberg), Chap. 805, Stats.
1999, which expedited the procedure for permanent placement of a
sibling group.
The bond between siblings, especially those in foster care,
cannot be underestimated:
Sibling relationships are emotionally powerful and
critically important not only in childhood but over the
course of a lifetime. As children, siblings form a child's
first peer group, and they typically spend more time with
each other than with anyone else. Children learn social
skills, particularly in sharing and managing conflict, from
negotiating with brothers and sisters. Sibling
relationships can provide a significant source of
continuity throughout a child's lifetime and are likely to
be the longest relationships that most people experience.
. . .
In many families involved with child welfare, sibling
relationships take on more importance because they can
provide the support and nurture that are not consistently
provided by parents. For children entering care, siblings
can serve as a buffer against the worst effects of harsh
circumstances. While sibling relationships in particular
families experiencing adverse situations do not always
compensate for other deficits, research has validated that,
SB 1099
Page 6
for many children, sibling relationships do promote
resilience.
(Child Welfare Information Gateway, Sibling Issues in Foster
Care and Adoption 4-5 (Jan. 2013).)
Despite Legal Recognition of the Importance of Sibling
Relationships, California's Foster Care System Continues to
Separate Siblings in Too Many Cases : Recent data provided by
the author reveal that children in foster care are often not
placed with all their siblings. Foster children in California
are placed together with all their siblings in only slightly
over half of all cases. Slightly older data reveal that in
approximately 29 percent of cases, foster youth have been
separated from all of their siblings. (Legislative Analyst's
Office, Protecting Children From Abuse and Neglect: Trends and
Issues 29 (Aug. 2013); B. Needell et al., Child Welfare Services
Reports for California (2008).)
This Bill Seeks to Better Maintain a Foster Child's Relationship
With His or Her Siblings : This bill revises the obligations of
the courts and social workers to better support foster
children's relationships with their siblings. Specifically,
this bill would require social workers to include specified
details about sibling visitation in court reports, and requires
that before any court renews a suspension of sibling
interaction, the court must make a renewed finding that sibling
interaction is contrary to the safety or well-being of either
child.
Under existing law, a dispositional hearing occurs after a
jurisdictional hearing in which the court has found that a child
has indeed suffered abuse or neglect, and thus comes under the
jurisdiction of the dependency court. The dispositional hearing
is considered the "meat and potatoes" of juvenile law because it
is when a family's future is charted, including any custody and
visitation orders. Among other statutory requirements, social
workers are required to prepare a study for the court,
discussing, among other things, sibling relationships. They
must include whether the child has siblings under the court's
jurisdiction, the nature of the sibling relationships, and the
appropriateness of maintaining those relationships.
Importantly, the social worker must note, in situations where
dependent siblings are not placed in the same home, why the
children were not placed together and what efforts are being
SB 1099
Page 7
made to place the children together. The social worker must
also include information related to the frequency and nature of
sibling visits.
This bill additionally requires that the social worker note
whether visits between siblings are supervised or unsupervised.
If supervised, this bill requires the social worker to indicate
the reasons why, and what needs to be accomplished in order for
the visits to be unsupervised. By specifying what additional
information needs to be included in a social worker's report,
this bill will help ensure that the nature and feasibility of
sibling relationships are considered.
This bill also requires, in situations where the sibling
interaction has been suspended, that at periodic review hearings
the court make a renewed finding that sibling interaction is
contrary to the safety or well-being of either child in order
for that suspension to continue. This new requirement will
ensure that courts reexamine the circumstances surrounding the
suspension of sibling interaction and order visitation when and
if it becomes appropriate.
Most Importantly, This Bill Helps to Maintain Sibling
Relationships When One Sibling is in Foster Care and Another is
Not : At least one appellate court found that the court could
not compel sibling visitation if one child was in foster care
and another was not, when the parent with whom the non-dependent
child was living was before the court. (In re Luke (2013) 221
Cal.App.4th 1082.) This bill seeks to change that result by
allowing, in the rare circumstance where one child has been
removed from the custody of a parent but another child has not
(or has been reunited with the parent), the court to grant
visitation with the nondependent sibling unless the court
determines that such visitation would be contrary to the safety
or well-being of either sibling.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Children's advocates write in support:
[J]ust last year the children's Bureau/Administration for
Children, Youth and Families (ACYF) released a report that
found a significant association between sibling visitation
and both permanency and well-being outcomes. In addition
all 50 states acknowledge that placing foster youth into
the care of relatives helps lessen the trauma of entering
the system and also better supports the healthy growth of
SB 1099
Page 8
the child due to mutual familial, cultural, and community
connections. The maintenance of sibling relationships
serves this same purpose by offering a foster child at
least one familiar constant (their sibling) in the
otherwise sea of strangers that make up the child welfare
system.
With these clear indicators reflecting the importance of
sibling relationships, it is essential that we continue to
support foster children who wish to visit with their
siblings. SB 1099 aims to address some of the shortcomings
in the visitation process while also providing clarity to
circumstances that have so far been overlooked. But, we
must also recognize that, in an experience often
characterized by loss, a key component to giving our foster
children the love they need and deserve is letting them
keep one of the most significant relationships they have
left: the one with their sibling.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Youth Connection (sponsor)
All Saints Church Foster Care Project
American Academy of Pediatrics, California
California Alliance of Child and Family Services
California State PTA
Children Now
Crittenon Services for Children & families
County Welfare Directors Association of California
East Bay Children's Law Offices
Juvenile Court Judges of California
Legal Advocates for Children and Youth
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334
SB 1099
Page 9