Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/19/1998 03:05 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SSHB 366 - NO CINA BASED SOLELY ON POVERTY Number 2003 CHAIRMAN BUNDE announed the next item on the agenda was SSHB 366, "An Act relating to child-in-need-of-aid proceedings," sponsored by Representative Dyson. Number 2020 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said he believes the legislature will pass legislation which will equip the various agencies of the state to take protective custody of children when necessary. He indicated they will slightly alter their emphasis and make the protection of children the highest priority. Representative Dyson said he does not believe there are any present examples of a need for the bill he has brought before the committee. It makes it very clear that the status of not having a home or being the level of income that the government would call below the poverty level, or having an unusual lifestyle is not negligence and does not give the state a basis on which to assume custody. Representative Dyson reiterated he does not know of cases where that has been abused, but there may be some. He said he has been working with the Administration on this legislation and he believes they do not have a problem with what they have written. Number 2144 CHAIRMAN BUNDE referred to line 6 of the bill stating he has a concern with the wording "generally accepted lifestyles standard." He stated the wording has too broad of a loophole, for example, if someone wants to live in the back of their car. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON responded that living in the back of a car (indisc.). It does not mean a child is being abused or neglected necessarily. Number 2211 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER shared the same concern about the wording on line 6, "lives a lifestyle that is different from the generally accepted lifestyle." He commented he thought living in the back of a car is covered by "lacks adequate housing" on line 5 of the bill. He stated he doesn't know what a generally accepted lifestyle is, but if you can live any lifestyle other than what is accepted, that may be precisely what it is that they should be taken away from their parents for. Representative Porter asked for an example of why we should have that language. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said he knows of a case where a parent was turned in by her sister for child abuse because she was a vegetarian which triggered a DFYS investigation which terrified a young mother and husband. He said the parents had a meeting with DFYS and the investigators of the division thought the children were healthy and doing very well. "And just because they ... TAPE 98-27, SIDE A Number 0001 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON continued "...child in need of aid if in fact they are not getting the food, shelter, protection and the freedom from physical, sexual, and mental injury. There is nothing in the bill that negates those things." REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated if DFYS investigated a complaint solely on the basis of the person being a vegetarian, then that needs to be fixed. He assumes there were probably other allegations which caused DFYS to investigate which this legislation would not change. CHAIRMAN BUNDE remarked the committee would have a legal opinion shortly. Number 0091 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said he hopes the person that made the complaint would have some charges brought against them. He then gave an example of an Alaskan lifestyle and asked what if a family who lives in an urban area runs out of food and decides to rough it out in the woods and not seek assistance in a nearby community, putting their child in jeopardy of malnutrition. Would this legislation cover those type of scenarios? Number 0173 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON responded that if the child is being malnourished or does not have adequate shelter, the state has the right to intervene. This legislation, in no way, does that. But, indeed, the family living on the Yukon River may not meet the federal poverty standards. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE remarked he wants it to be very clear on the record regarding that. CHAIRMAN BUNDE called on Susan Wibker to testify. Number 0244 SUSAN WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, Department of Law, came before the committee to testify. She advised the committee she was also testifying on behalf of the Department of Health and Social Services. She said both departments support Representative Dyson's amendment. She stated as she read the bill, she thought of all the families on the Homer Spit in the summer with healthy, well cared for, happy, loved children in tents. And there is absolutely no reason for the state to interfere unless there is a reason to be concerned about the health and safety of the children. She pointed out that the department does receive telephone calls regarding situations Representative Dyson described, which are well-intentioned calls, and investigators find there is no reason to get involved other than somebody does not agree with somebody else's lifestyle. Ms. Wibker stated this legislation makes it very clear to the worker and the courts that it has to be the health and safety of the child that is at risk, or the state shouldn't be involved. She said if there is better language for tightening up whatever we're going to call community norm, fine, but it is a good thing to have. CHAIRMAN BUNDE called on the next witness to testify via teleconference. Number 0339 DIANA BUFFINGTON, Chairman, Alaska Task Force on Family Law Reform; and President and State Coordinator for the Children's Right Council of Alaska, testified in support of HB 366 via teleconference from Kodiak. She stated, "I support this bill simply because we should not face the poverty level, or lacks adequate housing, or lives a different lifestyle that is not acceptable to other people." She then referred to a report by the U.S. National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect stating child advocates insist there are 2.7 million youngsters a year that are suffering grievance abuse, but statistics reflect total reports of suspected mistreatment, not substantiated individual cases. Ms. Buffington stated she feels this bill, added to the statutes, would give DFYS some guidelines on what constitutes a child in need. She suggested investigating what a loving and nurturing environment is and said DFYS needs to look at the environment, not just the housing facilities and the availability of money. Number 0574 CHAIRMAN BUNDE informed the committee if HB 366 was being referred to the Judiciary Committee where the committee would be able to review it again, they would be able to discuss lifestyle at that meeting and move the bill today. However, since there are questions to be answered, he suggested holding the bill for further consideration. Number 0597 REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if there's a loophole that the defense attorney could find to mess up the bill. He pointed out that the sponsor substitute states a child in need cannot be based solely on a person's lifestyle. He referred to lines 6-7 of the sponsor substitute and said he would be more comfortable with the wording "lives an otherwise harmless lifestyle that is different from the generally accepted lifestyle standard of the community" or something like that. Number 0645 MS. WIBKER referred the committee to lines 7-9 of SSHB 366 and stated she feels the last sentence was designed to address that issue which reads, "However this subsection may not be construed to prevent a court from finding that a child is in need of aid if the child has been subjected to conduct or conditions described in (a) of this section." She said subsection (a) lists all the grounds for jurisdiction. Therefore, if a child comes within the jurisdiction of the court under some other ground, they are still a child in need of aid. Number 0704 CHAIRMAN BUNDE stated he has concerns with the wording "alternate lifestyle." He noted in other parts of the legislature, legislation is working its way through which would prevent a homosexual marriage which connotates adopting or caring for children. He asked if this legislation would be an affirmative offense that would allow a homosexual couple to adopt because you cannot say that a child is in need of aid because they are choosing an alternative lifestyle. MS. WIBKER said she didn't think this legislation would have anything to do with whether a homosexual couple could adopt; it is strictly jurisdiction to be found a child in need of aid. CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if a single parent was openly homosexual, and if this bill passed, someone could not file a complaint with DFYS saying this is a child in need of aid because the parent is very overt in their homosexual behavior. MS. WIBKER stated the way the law is written, unless that child falls under the jurisdiction for abuse or neglect, the state cannot do anything. Number 0800 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said part of what he is doing here is defensive, in a sense. He feels this legislation is a small step to say no. He said there is a very narrow area that they want the state to take jurisdiction. He pointed out that the department has struggled to find, train, and keep good folks. Once in a while if they get someone who doesn't have good judgment or is new to the state and not familiar with urban Alaskan lifestyle, this bill adds some protection to draconian actions by new and inexperienced staff. Number 0877 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON made a motion to move SSHB 366 out of committee. There being no objection, SSHB 366 was moved out of the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|