BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1099
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1099 (Steinberg)
As Amended August 22, 2014
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :35-0
JUDICIARY 9-0 APPROPRIATIONS 14-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Wieckowski, Wagner, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Alejo, Chau, Dickinson, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Garcia, Maienschein, | |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
| |Muratsuchi, Stone | |Gomez, Holden, Linder, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Encourages visitation with siblings for children in
the dependency and juvenile justice 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)Requires that the case plan submitted to the juvenile court
for a ward placed in foster care include the following:
a) Whether there are any siblings, the nature of the
relationship between the youth and his or her siblings, as
specified, and the appropriateness of developing or
maintaining those sibling relationships.
SB 1099
Page 2
b) If sibling are not placed together:
i) The frequency and nature of visits between siblings;
ii) Whether visits are supervised, and if so, why, and
what needs to be accomplished in order to have
unsupervised visits; and
iii) Any plan to increase visitation between siblings.
c) Any continuing need to suspend sibling interaction, if
applicable.
3)Provides that it is the intent of the Legislature to preserve
and strengthen the sibling relationship of a dependent child
or ward in foster care with a another sibling who remains in
the physical 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.
4)Allows a dependent child, nonminor dependent or ward to
petition the court for visitation with a nondependent sibling
who is in the physical 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.
5)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.
6)Allows a dependent child, nonminor dependent or ward 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.
7)Adds chaptering out language for SB 977 (Liu) of the current
legislative session and SB 1460 (Human Services Committee) of
the current legislative session.
SB 1099
Page 3
EXISTING LAW :
1)Allows a juvenile court to adjudicate a minor a dependent of
the court if the child has been neglected or abused.
2)Provides that a juvenile court has jurisdiction over a child
when that child has committed acts that trigger delinquency
jurisdiction rendering the child a ward.
3)Requires states to use "reasonable efforts" to place dependent
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.
4)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.
5)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.
6)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.
7)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
SB 1099
Page 4
planning.
8)Requires a social worker, where possible and appropriate, to
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.
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.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)State costs likely in the range of $325,000 to $650,000
General Fund (GF) annually for increased workload to social
workers to document detailed information on sibling
interaction efforts, assuming an additional 15 minutes to 30
minutes annually for an estimated 17,800 dependents who are
not placed with siblings.
2)Unknown, but potentially significant state costs (GF) for
local agencies to facilitate additional sibling visits between
dependents and non-dependent children that the courts have not
previously granted.
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),
Chapter 805, Statutes of 1999.) Since then, California has
SB 1099
Page 5
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 juvenile
courts the authority to order visitation between a dependent or
a ward in a foster care placement and a non-dependent or
non-ward siblings in specified circumstances. Additionally,
this bill requires that the case plan submitted on behalf a ward
with a foster care placement must include information on
siblings and efforts made to encourage sibling contact. This
bill also updates existing sibling visitation statutes, such as
requiring more detailed information in social worker reports, to
better encourage visits between siblings.
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, for many children, sibling relationships do
promote resilience.
SB 1099
Page 6
(Child Welfare Information Gateway, Sibling Issues in Foster
Care and Adoption 4-5 (January 2013).)
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% of cases, foster
youth have been separated from all of their siblings. This bill
seeks to improve those figures by revising the obligations of
the courts and social workers to better support foster
children's relationships with their siblings.
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.
Analysis Prepared by : Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916)
319-2334
FN: 0005225