Legislature(1997 - 1998)

05/01/1998 09:06 AM Senate HES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
                                                                               
            HB 366 - NO CINA BASED SOLELY ON POVERTY                           
                                                                               
LISA TORKELSON, legislative aide to Representative Fred Dyson,                 
sponsor of HB 366, stated the bill will prevent DFYS from declaring            
a child as a Child in Need of Aid (CINA) on the basis that the                 
child is poor, homeless, or lives a lifestyle that is not                      
considered quite normal.  She recounted a case in which a mother               
was reported to DFYS as being neglectful because her children ate              
a vegetarian diet, and it took the woman quite some time to clear              
the matter with DFYS.  Also, many families live on boats for long              
periods of time.  Representative Dyson is concerned that a DFYS                
worker, new to Alaska, might find such an alternative lifestyle                
unacceptable.  HB 366 will preclude DFYS's involvement in such                 
situations, unless other conditions exist, such as sexual abuse.               
                                                                               
Number 059                                                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked Ms. Torkelson if SB 272, considered by the               
committee on the previous Wednesday, contained the provisions of HB
366.                                                                           
                                                                               
MS. TORKELSON said that was correct.                                           
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked if the two bills contain any differences.                
                                                                               
MS. TORKELSON believed they were the same.                                     
                                                                               
CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked if HB 366 will act as an insurance policy.               
                                                                               
SENATOR LEMAN asked what the phrase "adequate housing" means.                  
                                                                               
MS. TORKELSON answered it means living in a shelter.  If a person              
has no housing and is living in another's shelter, that person                 
could be considered to lack adequate housing.  She noted a tent may            
not be considered adequate.                                                    
                                                                               
SENATOR LEMAN asked if the bill contains a definition of adequate              
housing.                                                                       
                                                                               
SUSAN WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General, stated the Department of             
Law supports HB 366.  She explained there is no specific statutory             
definition of the phrase "adequate housing."                                   
                                                                               
SENATOR LEMAN asked Ms. Wibker what adequate housing meant to her.             
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER stated if a family is not living in a structure, and                
instead lives in a car, DFYS could not take legal custody of the               
children based on where the children live.                                     
                                                                               
Number 119                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked what would happen if the temperature was 20                
below zero, or 102 degrees.                                                    
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER answered the social worker would try to help the family             
get into adequate housing but DFYS would not have grounds to take              
legal custody of the children.  If the children's health and safety            
were at risk, and the family did nothing about it, even when                   
offered assistance, DFYS might then be able to take custody.                   
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN stated DFYS and various assistance groups train                  
people in living skills to enable them to live a normal life.  She             
asked if those services would cease from being offered if HB 366               
is enacted.                                                                    
                                                                               
Number 143                                                                     
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said nothing would preclude DFYS from offering                      
assistance.  Many times when a DFYS worker goes to a home, the                 
worker provides information about available services and offers                
assistance with application forms.                                             
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked if a child found to be in need of aid is                   
removed from the home.                                                         
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said not automatically.  Most of the children in legal              
custody of the state live at home since removal is a separate                  
question and legal burden.                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked if DFYS has oversight of a child in need of                
aid.                                                                           
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said that is correct, and that the child would be living            
with his/her parents.                                                          
                                                                               
Number 156                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked what the difference would be in the level of               
service provided by DFYS in the absence of the CINA determination.             
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said if the child is not in the legal custody of the                
state, a DFYS worker could offer to provide assistance, which the              
family could accept on a voluntary basis.  If the family was not               
interested, the worker would have no grounds to do anything.                   
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN commented she had a similar conversation with a DFYS             
worker in the recent past, who pointed out that DFYS's ability to              
strongly encourage families to change their lifestyles regarding               
things like sanitation, food preparation, and general slovenly                 
circumstances is much greater because of the hammer DFYS has.  She             
questioned whether HB 366 will remove that hammer.                             
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said she does not believe so, if the worker was                     
referring to situations in which DFYS has no legal grounds to do               
anything, but wants to make suggestions to a family.  If the family            
refuses to make any changes, the question then becomes whether the             
situation will later give rise to the state taking legal custody if            
no changes are made.  For example, DFYS could not take legal                   
custody on the basis that the family lives in a filthy house.                  
However, if the condition of the house presents the risk of                    
hepatitis to a child because feces is all around, a health hazard              
exists.  The DFYS worker would make efforts to assist the family to            
correct the problem but if the family refuses, DFYS would have to              
determine whether the health risk is great enough to warrant taking            
custody of the child.  In those cases a doctor might be consulted              
regarding the health risk.                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked if the Department of Law supports HB 366.                  
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said it does.                                                       
                                                                               
SENATOR GREEN asked if DFYS field workers support this legislation.            
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER said she has not talked to all of the field workers.                
She stated the department circulates proposed legislation to                   
employees at all levels, and invites comments.                                 
                                                                               
Number 220                                                                     
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON informed committee members he sponsored this              
legislation because he and his wife got involved in a case in which            
a woman reported her sister to DFYS because the sister's children              
were malnourished.  The children were vegetarians and were not in              
jeopardy of malnourishment.  Second, many families, including his              
own at one time, live on boats.  His concern is that the status of             
a family should not be considered grounds for DFYS interference                
with custody; the child would have to be in danger before DFYS                 
could intervene.  HB 366 is meant to act as a preventative measure             
just in case DFYS has a less enlightened professional group at                 
sometime in the future.  Alaskans appreciate diverse lifestyles,               
and he wants to prevent DFYS from taking away someone's children               
only because a home does not have indoor plumbing or a similar                 
condition exists.                                                              
                                                                               
Number 244                                                                     
                                                                               
SENATOR LEMAN questioned whether a standard definition of the term             
"lifestyle different from generally accepted lifestyle" exists.  He            
noted some behaviors cross the line and are generally unaccepted,              
and he would not want those lifestyles to be protected by this law.            
                                                                               
MS. WIBKER replied that phrase would mean, to an attorney for the              
Department of Law that has to intervene on behalf of the child,                
that in order for DFYS to have legal custody, DFYS should have to              
prove abuse or neglect.  If the only evidence DFYS has is that the             
family lives in a cabin with no running water, DFYS should not be              
involved in the case.  The bill may protect lifestyles that some               
may not approve of, but it says if a lifestyle does not involve                
abuse or neglect, DFYS should not be involved.  HB 366 is designed             
to be a limitation on the state's ability to interfere with                    
families.                                                                      
                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON added this issue gets down to the fact that               
the Legislature has not empowered DFYS to take custody of a child              
because the parents are doing things that others might consider                
morally incorrect, such as engaging in permiscuous behavior or                 
believing in a natural law philosophy.  In his view, this bill will            
create a balancing act; some of the cases will require judgment                
calls but overall, HB 366 strengthens family rights short of                   
neglect and abuse.                                                             
                                                                               
SENATOR LEMAN moved HB 366 out of committee with individual                    
recommendations.  There being no objection, the motion carried.                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects