Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/20/2001 01:18 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 164 - GRANDPARENTS' RIGHTS REGARDING CINA Number 0165 CHAIR ROKEBERG announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 164, "An Act prescribing the rights of grandparents related to child-in-need-of-aid hearings; and amending Rules 3, 7, 10, 15, and 19, Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules." [Before the committee was CSHB 164(HES).] Number 0160 REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, explained that two years ago, the legislature passed a bill that gives foster parents the right to be heard in disposition hearings and custody hearings. He said he is seeking to do the same thing for grandparents via HB 164. When the state is taking custody of children, he noted, oftentimes it is the grandparents who provide the most stable influence. He added that HB 164 does not make grandparents "a party" in the technical sense, but it does give them a right to be heard in court so that their perspective regarding a child's placement can be taken into account. He said that as far as he knows, there is no one who opposes HB 164, and that every grandparent's organization in the state that he is aware of supports HB 164. He noted, however, that the department has asked not to be burdened with seeking out eligible grandparents. He pointed out that HB 164 states that the grandparents will have to identify themselves and prove that they are indeed the grandparents - either biologically or legally - before they have a right to provide input before the court. TAPE 01-69, SIDE A Number 0001 MARCI SCHMIDT testified via teleconference and said simply that she is in favor of HB 164. She then asked what the term "certain" means as it is used on page 4, line 5, with regard to "child-in-need-of-aid proceedings". REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ opined that using the term "certain" is merely pro forma. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON agreed, and said that that is his sense too; it did not create a limitation of any sort, it is simply the way "these legal things" get written. CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that the language on page 4 is not substantive law anyway; it is merely a court-rule-change provision. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ offered that this provision might be referred to if, for example, there is a CINA (child in need of aid) proceeding where an attorney is being sanctioned. Number 0246 SHARON LEE SHIELDS briefly testified via teleconference in support of HB 164. She relayed that in her situation, she was prohibited from seeing her granddaughter because she attempted to intervene when her granddaughter started reporting physical abuse. She said she believes that grandparents should be recognized for their valuable participation in their grandchildren's lives. Number 0319 BETTY SHORT, President, Alaska Organization for Grandparents Rights, testified via teleconference and said that HB 164 allows grandparents to have the opportunity to be involved in the hearings held by the state in cases involving their grandchildren. This is a very important procedure, she noted, both for the courts and the Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS), which will help properly establish what is in the best interest of the child as is described in AS 25.24.150(c)[(1)-(9)]. She asked how else would the court, caseworker, court-appointed special advocate (CASA), or [guardian] ad litem find out what is in the best interest of the child without gaining input from outside the parties. MS. SHORT recounted the example of one grandparent who has evidence - phone recordings, affidavits, witnesses, and police reports - but no one at DFYS will see or talk to her, or return her phone calls. In her own case where she had reported abuse of [her grandchild], she said the caseworker did not even bother to interview any of the witnesses who had seen the abuse occurring, but had instead sent a letter to the mother that the charges of abuse were unfounded. After hiring an attorney and going to court, she explained, the results of a further investigation by a [guardian] ad litem convinced the magistrate to confer guardianship to Ms. Short. She offered that grandparents could help speed up investigations with their input and past knowledge, as well as provide a safe and familiar haven for the grandchildren while any investigation takes place. Number 0545 CHAIR ROKEBERG closed the public hearing on HB 164. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ expressed the concern that HB 164 mandates that the department provide written notice to a grandparent, but does not provide any exception if the grandparent's presence is not in the best interest of the child. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON opined that such a situation is provided for. He referred to page 2, line 25, which says: However, the court may limit the presence of the foster parent or other out-of-home care provider and any grandparent of the child to the time during which the person's testimony is being given if it is (1) in the best interest of the child; or (2) necessary to protect the privacy interests of the parties and will not be detrimental to the child. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ pointed out that the gap between Section 2 and Section 3 is that the department is going to send a notice and then the court is going to make a determination. There is no provision if the department has information that would indicate that the best interest of the child or the privacy interests would be negatively impacted; HB 164 does not give the department any discretion. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON acknowledged that there are some cases where the child is in need of aid because the grandparent is the perpetrator of crimes against the child. He pointed out that the court does have the discretion to determine whether a grandparent should be at the hearing or in the presence of the child. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ argued that if the department has that kind of information, it should also have the discretion to refrain from sending notification to that particular grandparent. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON agreed that perhaps a conceptual amendment could be adopted such that the department would be released from the responsibility to notify if the court has found that the grandparent has participated in crimes against the child. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ pointed out, however, that this solution would still require a court determination. He opined that the department should have the discretion to refrain from sending notice if, for example, it discovers during the course of an investigation prior to any court proceeding that the grandparent [should not have access to the child]. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON observed that this could lead to a "sticky" situation because many of the grandparents with whom he has spoken say they are uneasy about leaving that sort of decision to the discretion of a single person in the DFYS administration. He reminded members that most of these cases will have a guardian ad litem appointed who will be looking out for the best interest of the child. CHAIR ROKEBERG opined that if there is a public record that a grandparent has committed an offense against the child, the department should have the discretion not to notify that grandparent. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES pointed out that there could also be situations in which the grandparent is unfit to be with the child but does not have any record of abuse. Number 0970 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ made a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1 to Section 3, to the effect that if a grandparent has been convicted of a crime against the child in question, or is subject to a no contact order, the department is relieved of the responsibility of notifying the grandparent of the proceedings. There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 1047 REPRESENTATIVE JAMES moved to report CSHB 164(HES), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 164(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|