Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/15/1999 03:08 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 15, 1999
3:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Co-Chair
Representative John Coghill, Co-Chair
Representative Jim Whitaker
Representative Joe Green
Representative Carl Morgan
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Allen Kemplen
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
* HOUSE BILL NO. 177
"An Act relating to foster parents; relating to the right of foster
parents to have notice of, and testify at, delinquency hearings and
to the disclosure of minors' records to foster parents; and
amending Rules 3, 7, 10, 12, 21, 23, and 25, Alaska Delinquency
Rules."
- MOVED CSHB 177(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
* HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 36
Relating to rejecting the conclusions in a recent article published
by the American Psychological Association that suggests that sexual
relationships between adults and children might be positive for
children; and urging the President of the United States and the
United States Congress to similarly reject these conclusions.
- MOVED CSHJR 36(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 70
"An Act relating to questionnaires or surveys administered in
public schools."
- MOVED CSHB 70(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 177
SHORT TITLE: FOSTER CARE & DELINQUENT MINORS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
4/07/99 670 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/07/99 670 (H) HES, JUD
4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HJR 36
SHORT TITLE: AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION REPORT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON, Ogan
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
4/07/99 670 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
4/07/99 670 (H) HES
4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 70
SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC SCHOOL SURVEYS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/25/99 81 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
1/25/99 81 (H) HES
4/06/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
4/06/99 (H) HEARD AND HELD
4/06/99 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/06/99 (H) MINUTE(HES)
4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
LISA TORKELSON, Legislative Assistant
to Representative Fred Dyson
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 104
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-6881
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented sponsor statement for HB 177.
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer
Youth Corrections
Division of Family and Youth Services
Department of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 110630
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Telephone: (907) 465-3228
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 177.
RHEA FARBERMAN, Associate Executive Director
Public Communications Office
American Psychological Association
750 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Telephone: (202) 336-5700
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 36.
DEBRA GERRISH
9202 Emily Way
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 789-3236
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 36.
MARY ROZENZWEIG, Executive Director
Substance Abuse Directors Association
4111 Minnesota Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Telephone: (907) 770-2927
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
ANDREE McLEOD
3721 Young Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
Telephone: (907) 561-8595
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
DEE HUBBARD
4251 Pinnacle Circle
Anchorage, Alaska 99504
Telephone: (907) 337-6370
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
DIANE ETTER
1550 Crescent Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
Telephone: (907) 562-4822
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
BETH SHOBER, Health Specialist
Teaching and Learning Support
Department of Education
801 West 10th Street, Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-2887
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
DOUGLAS GARDNER, Assistant Attorney General
Oil, Gas and Mining Section
Civil Division (Juneau)
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Telephone: (907) 465-3600
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 99-37, SIDE A
Number 0001
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:08 p.m. Members
present at the call to order were Representatives Dyson, Coghill,
Brice and Kemplen. Representative Morgan joined the meeting at
3:15 p.m., and Representatives Whitaker and Green joined the
meeting at 3:41 p.m.
HB 177 - FOSTER CARE & DELINQUENT MINORS
Number 0094
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the first order of business as House
Bill No. 177, "An Act relating to foster parents; relating to the
right of foster parents to have notice of, and testify at,
delinquency hearings and to the disclosure of minors' records to
foster parents; and amending Rules 3, 7, 10, 12, 21, 23, and 25,
Alaska Delinquency Rules."
Number 0128
LISA TORKELSON, Legislative Assistant to Representative Fred Dyson,
presented the sponsor statement for HB 177. Last year they
introduced HB 456 which gave foster parents the right to have
notice of and testify at child-in-need-of-aid (CINA) and
delinquency hearings and to have information disclosed to them
about their particular foster child. They were able to put the
half that dealt with CINA cases into the governor's child
protection bill last year and it passed. Because it was a 64-page
bill it was limited to CINA, and the delinquency half didn't get
put in. This bill brings it up to speed with the CINA half. She
offered a committee substitute which clarifies that the department,
rather than the court, would give notice of the hearing, and a
foster parent would have information relevant to the foster child;
not necessarily all information.
Number 0284
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 177, version 1-LSO760\D, Luckhaupt, 4/13/99,
as a work draft. There being no objection, Version D was before
the committee.
Number 0368
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer, Youth Corrections,
Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS), Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS), came forward to testify in support of
HB 177. The provisions contained in the proposed committee
substitute are appropriate in that they are now in effect in the
child-in-need-of-aid proceedings. It is proper public policy that
they bring parity to the foster parent privileges and rights in the
delinquency statute.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 177, version
1-LSO760\D, Luckhaupt, 4/13/99, from committee with individual
recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note. There being no
objection, CSHB 177(HES) moved from the House Health, Education and
Social Services Standing Committee.
HJR 36 - AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION REPORT
Number 0473
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the next order of business as House
Joint Resolution No. 36, Relating to rejecting the conclusions in
a recent article published by the American Psychological
Association that suggests that sexual relationships between adults
and children might be positive for children; and urging the
President of the United States and the United States Congress to
similarly reject these conclusions.
Number 0503
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON, sponsor, commented that it is sad that they even
have to deal with this issue. The American Psychological
Association has published many scholarly papers over the years on
subjects dealing with human behavior. By their admission, they
have published 40 or 50 that detail and document the negative
affects of child sexual abuse. Last year they published a paper,
"A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual
Abuse Using College Samples" that was interesting and in startling
contrast to the results and conclusions of other investigators. It
was a literature search of self-reporting college students. In
their conclusion, they suggested that child sexual abuse may not
necessarily be as harmful as assumed before. They suggested that
people dealing in this field, including policymakers, may want to
adopt less-pejorative terms in describing the activity. They even
suggested that some or many of the people interviewed had a
positive result from their sexual contact with older people.
Alaska has taken a strong position that adult sexual contact with
children is a felony. Last year's bill made it clearer that the
persistence of that activity is a major factor in authorizing the
DFYS to remove children from their home, and if it continues,
parental rights can be terminated.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON is concerned that unchallenged, this information
will go on to be used to intimidate or influence those with a
strong stand on protecting children from being sexually exploited.
He was careful not to question their findings; he questioned their
methodology, but agreed their findings were logical given their
methodology. In their packets is information from another
researcher who highlighted some of the problems in the methodology.
He believes it is an unwarranted leap to go from generalizing about
a self-reporting, young college group to the general population. He
believes that many of the dysfunctions from child sexual abuse
don't show up until later on in life, often in a marriage or close
relationship.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON added that since this article was published, the
APA has been particularly active in saying that they never endorsed
the conclusions of this article. Most of the other articles that
they have published in the field have shown that child sexual abuse
is harmful. The APA was the vehicle of publishing it; they believe
it is helpful information to be added to the body of knowledge and
he doesn't quarrel with that. There are a couple of nationally
active groups who encourage adult-child relationships who claim
this as a great backup for their perspective; that it is good for
adults to be involved with children sexually.
Number 0906
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE wanted to be sure they were not talking about
someone 18 years old dating someone 16 or 17 and asked for a
clearer definition of age ranges.
Number 0944
LISA TORKELSON replied that on page 46 of the study in their
packets, it distinguishes between "adult-adolescent sex" and
"adult-child sex," but she doesn't know where this study makes the
age distinctions.
Number 1114
RHEA FARBERMAN, Associate Executive Director, Public Communications
Office, American Psychological Association, testified via
teleconference from Puerto Rico. She thanked the committee for the
opportunity to clarify the APA's position on child sexual abuse.
The APA agrees with the resolution. She read from a prepared
statement:
The American Psychological Association (APA), through its
members, sponsored initiatives and publishing, has a long
record in the area of the prevention and treatment of
child abuse and neglect including sexual abuse. In the
national legislative arena, APA has played an active role
in advocating for programs expanding child abuse
prevention, treatment and research. And, through its
Coordinating Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, APA
has been a leader in helping the mental health profession
document and treat the ill effects of child abuse.
In 1990, the APA council of Representatives, which is our
governing body, passed a resolution calling for a
national strategy to prevent and treat child abuse and
neglect and called such action a matter of the highest
urgency. APA's position is, therefore, very clear I
think: The sexual abuse of children in wrong and harmful
to children and the families. As a publisher of
psychological research, APA publishes thousands of
research reports every year. But, publication of a
finding of a research project within an APA journal is in
no way an endorsement of that finding by the Association.
MS. FARBERMAN stated anyone who suggests that APA is anything but
vehemently opposed to child sexual abuse is either ignorant of the
work that the Association and its members have done in the area, or
is not with the majority of the psychological research on the
issue, or is attempting to distort APA's position. The APA
applauds the committee's call for further research into the affects
of child sexual abuse and for treatment for families and children
to recover from it. She went on to read:
No responsible mental health organization, including the
American Psychological Association, endorses pedophilia
or denies its negative effect on children. Any statement
that suggests otherwise is just a distortion. The
American Psychiatric Association, which publishes the
DSM-IV [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, Fourth Edition] writes: "An adult who engages
in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal
and immoral act which never can be considered normal or
socially acceptable behavior." This statement is fully
consistent with the policies of the American
Psychological Association and with the views of mental
health professionals all over the world.
MS. FARBERMAN suggested they add language to the proposed
resolution which adopts some of the language the APA has put out in
their statement which clarifies APA's position. They think it is
important for the public to know that the mental health community
says loud and clear that pedophilia is wrong and that child sexual
abuse is harmful.
Number 1297
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Farberman if the APA regularly has a
disclaimer in their publications.
MS. FARBERMAN explained that a disclaimer appears on the inside
front cover of the journal, and it states that APA in no way
endorses the research findings of any particular study.
Number 1327
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the papers APA receives are subjected to
peer review in the selection process for publication.
MS. FARBERMAN answered yes, all of their articles go through a peer
review process before they are published.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked at what age does childhood end.
MS. FARBERMAN answered that one of the complications depends on
what study is looked at in interpreting the literature. The legal
definition is 18. Different studies have looked at different
developmental phases. One of the research questions that the
authors may have wanted to look at is, "is sexual abuse more
harmful to younger children than older children." That might be a
legitimate research question. Regardless of the answer to that
question, it is still wrong and is still harmful to children.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN commented that childcare is usually provided
through sixth grade, and he asked for clarification on the gray
area between childhood and adulthood when children become youths.
He asked if Ms. Farberman if she had any sources so he could better
understand that.
Number 1356
MS. FARBERMAN offered to look into it for him. She guessed there
are some studies that broke down age groups and looked at young
children, children, teenagers and older teenagers. One of the
questions researchers wanted to look at was the degree of harm
based on age group and developmental maturity. She believes the
bottom line is that the great majority of literature shows that
harm is done to children no matter whether they are six or 16.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked for a definition of "meta-analytic."
MS. FARBERMAN replied it means a study of studies. The researchers
in this case looked at a number of studies and pooled all the data
from all the studies and looked at them as one large data set.
Number 1532
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON assured her that the resolution does not infer
that the APA endorsed the suggestions and conclusions in this
article. They will entertain her suggested amendment.
Number 1567
DEBRA GERRISH came forward to testify on behalf of herself. She is
a survivor of child abuse, and she shared her experience of being
sexually abused as a child. She had blocked those experiences out
of her mind because they were so painful. She agreed that a child
is a child until he/she is 18. The child's mind works like a child
and doesn't know how to make those choices, so there could be a
child willing to go along with the sexual abuse to hold a family
together. She explained she was a willing child because she
thought it would hold her family together. She has had to deal
with depression and post-traumatic stress from her relationship
with both of her parents. She encouraged the committee to pass
this resolution. Any child who is out there being sexually abused
is going to be affected.
MS. GERRISH believes that childcare isn't provided after age 12 is
because society says "We can't afford childcare after 12." Most of
the children who get in trouble get in trouble between the time
school ends and parents get home. "If we were a society that truly
cared about children, we would have some kind of childcare, some
programs in place, to help those kids to keep them out of trouble."
MS. GERRISH requested that the surgeon general be added to list of
people who will receive a copy of the resolution.
Number 1705
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON noted that is a good idea. He also suggested
that Ms. Gerrish could also represent scores other victims and
survivors of sexual abuse who don't speak up and report it.
Number 1756
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 1 which added on
line 22 ", Surgeon General of the United States,".
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There
being none, Amendment 1 was adopted.
The committee took an at-ease from 3:40 p.m. to 3:44 p.m.
Number 1808
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 2 which will be
on page 2, between line 5 and 6, which adds an additional whereas.
It reads:
WHEREAS virtually all studies in this area, including
those published by the American Psychological
Association, condemn child sexual abuse as criminal and
harmful to children; and
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There
being none, Amendment 2 was adopted.
Number 1957
REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER made a motion to move the proposed CSHJR 36
from the committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, CSHJR 36(HES) moved from the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON informed the committee that this study was
brought to their attention by Representative Ogan's office, and
they have been supportive of this.
The committee took an at-ease from 3:48 p.m. to 3:49 p.m.
HB 70 - PUBLIC SCHOOL SURVEYS
Number 1996
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the next order of business as House
Bill No. 70, "An Act relating to questionnaires or surveys
administered in public schools."
Number 2029
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained that HB 98 amended the code to create
ASA 14.03.110 in 1979. At that time, Av Gross, the Attorney
General, interpreted that bill to say: "The use of broadly based
anonymous surveys of school-aged children to determine the
frequency of alcohol, drugs and child abuse tools used in the
efficiency of a government programs would be precluded by the
bill." When the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was done last
year, there was some consternation in some places in the state. It
asked the question if parents needed to be in the loop and did
their permission for their children to participate need to be
active or passive. Passive permission means if the school doesn't
hear from the parents, it is presumed to be okay.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON indicated that constituents asked that this
legislation address and clarify the legal position. The first
attempt was to insert the word "personal" so it would read
"personal family matters" into the code, but the DHSS said that
would make it too tough to get the survey done. They worked
together and came up with HB 70 which allows a one-time-per-year
blanket parental approval for their children to participate in
anonymous surveys. The parents would still be notified before the
survey is given. The department will still say that it is too
tough, and the logistics of it will preclude it happening, and some
districts will opt out. They only need one-eighth of the student
population in order for the survey to be valid. He contends that
most school districts will be easily able to identify the children
who have the annual blanket permission.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to adopt the proposed committee
substitute for HB 70, version 1-LSO263\G, Ford, 4/6/99, as a work
draft. There being no objection, Version G was before the
committee.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON noted the DHSS has told him the raw data gathered
is valuable. He agreed it is of some value to find the magnitude
of the students' social problems, and there are funding streams
available if the state has participated in gathering this data. He
is not against the survey but wants the parents to be actively
involved in the process. He noted that in Sitka, after they chose
active parental permission, they now have groups of parents and
students who meet to discuss and deal with some of the problems
illuminated by the survey.
TAPE 99-37, SIDE B
Number 2181
MARY ROSENZWEIG, Executive Director, Substance Abuse Directors
Association, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
thanked the committee for understanding the importance of the YRBS.
The YRBS is the only good standard they have to target prevention
programs and to measure how well their programs are working. She
noted that she didn't have a copy of the proposed CS in front of
her but said the blanket permission really adds to no value except
that it is administratively burdensome and introduces an element of
bias to the study. No one really knows about the children whose
parents checked the no box. They don't know if the parents were
just in a bad mood that day or if they always say no when presented
with this type of question. They wonder if the children who don't
participate in the study are more or less likely to have risk
behaviors. They just won't know about those children.
MS. ROSENZWEIG offered their support for the second part of the
amended version which makes parents more involved. Parent
involvement is paramount to substance abuse prevention. If parents
see this study presented to them, and they don't want their
children to participate, even though the association would like to
have that data, they believe the parents have the right to say no.
They are in support of amending the bill to require that parents be
given notice of the survey and that parents be given the
opportunity to refuse to have their child participate. That will
allow for parent involvement and continued data collection.
Number 2065
ANDREE McLEOD testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a
parent. She supports whatever bill they put forth that will ask
parents to give written permission. She wants to know whenever her
child is going to be asked questions that deals with his behavior
or anything else; then she can teach him about privacy matters, who
to divulge that information to, what kind of information to
divulge; it is her responsibility, duty and right. She has a lot
of information she would like to send to them, including a
resolution that the Anchorage Assembly passed, a joint meeting of
the Anchorage school board and assembly, where Bob Christal,
Superintendent of the Anchorage School District, reported that the
municipal Health Department and the state of Alaska are the primary
beneficiaries of this survey [YRBS] and not the schools. He
stressed that it is an issue that the district gets very little
benefit from. He added that if the survey is done, it will be at
the request of groups outside the district that need this
information. This is nothing to do with education. It diminishes
the study time of students. They already have to be assessed to
get their diplomas. This only gets in the way.
MS. McLEOD referred to a letter from Marjorie Speers, Ph. D.,
Deputy Associate Director for Science, Department of Health and
Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
Atlanta, GA, to Dr. John Middaugh in the state epidemiologist
office. Dr. Speers states that the YRBS is not even research, it
is just for the state to know the numbers.
MS. McLEOD believes that the boundaries for privacy are being
disregarded and violated. The law states simply that schools have
to get written parental permission for field trips, school
activities and immunizations. "All of a sudden, written permission
is being scrutinized as to what it means. It's not scrutinized for
a field trip. Kids stay in school if they don't have permission.
They don't go to a school activity, they can't belong to one
because written permission isn't there. But all of a sudden now
it's okay not to have written permission. It'll be okay to say no.
The right thing to do is to put in whatever bill to protect the
rights of parents and families to privacy." Another way to get
this information is through a key informant survey which is more
reliable and cheaper. She said she also has paperwork that follows
the money trail. The federal law states that the prior written
consent of the parent is needed to protect pupil rights. She
believes that the state has not been doing it right, and she urged
the committee to get it right.
Number 1872
DEE HUBBARD testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a
parent. She told the committee that there are other surveys being
done in schools that parents don't find out about until after the
fact. She brought their attention to the letter in the packets
from Marti Hughes which talked about what happened to her son's
high school class last year. Parents don't know how many other
surveys are out there, but they would like to know because they are
paying for them. She agreed that there often is a problem in a
student-teacher relationship where students won't say no if they
are given a choice to participate in a survey. In Anchorage
schools, if there is no parent permission the child will not go on
a field trip.
MS. HUBBARD had seen the YRBS after the fact in 1995 and asked the
middle school principal if she would have let her child take this
survey, and the principal said "Absolutely not." Ms. Hubbard's
husband was furious when he saw the survey. He commented that it
reminded him of when he attended the Bureau of Indian Affairs
school and was subjected to pervasive surveys and questions where
they had no choice but to answer them.
MS. HUBBARD referred to the statement last week that they are
missing the children they really want to survey. She wonders if
the survey is targeting certain groups of children. She would like
an answer to know how the targeting is being done. Finally, as a
parent, she has not turned the right of educating her children over
to the state. She is a taxpayer, a property owner and she wants to
know what she is paying for. Irrespective of who is administering
this survey, she is paying for it. She wants the right to be able
to say yes or no. She would most likely say no to a blanket
permission at the time of registration.
Number 1686
DIANE ETTER testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a
parent. She is in favor of any measure that gives parents active
permission before any survey. She feels parents need control over
some part of their children's lives. A survey is totally
non-academic part of school. There should be no reason it would be
imposed without active parental permission. In addition, she
favors any measure that would cut down on unnecessary, non-academic
activities taking up classroom instructional time. The erosion in
classroom instructional time is a huge concern for her. Already
there are in-service days, half days during parent-teacher
conferences, shortened days for school assemblies, time taken in
class to register for next year's classes and fill out teacher
evaluations, time to take standardized tests, the upcoming
benchmark exams and exit exams. She is concerned that they are
losing instructional time in huge chunks, and she strongly objects
to administering any survey in school that would further erode
instructional time when it is something unrelated to academics.
Parents must have active parental consent to help control this
trend and to be fully aware of each survey given to their children.
She suggested doing the surveys somewhere else besides in school
like shopping malls, state fairs, sporting events and any number of
places to get large groups of children in a random sampling.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained that this bill allows for the parent to
give one time per year permission to participate in an anonymous
survey, but it also requires that the parent be notified before the
survey happens and be given another chance to opt out. He asked if
that meets her criteria for keeping the parents informed.
MS. ETTER responded that she is not in favor of any survey that is
not academic being given to her children without her permission
prior to that survey.
Number 1530
BETH SHOBER, Health Specialist, Teaching and Learning Support,
Department of Education (DOE), came forward to testify on behalf
the DOE to express some of their concerns about the possible
unintended consequences of this proposed legislation. There are
two major areas that could possibly be impacted dependant upon the
interpretation. One is on curriculum and implementation of
curriculum, and the other is on counseling services within the
school. She shared copies of an article called "Emotional Lessons"
which appeared in "NW Education, Spring 1999". Perhaps the intent
is not to impact curriculum in the implementation of programs, but
it could be interpreted that way. This article is an example. It
speaks very well to the issues of dispelling fears after a crisis
like the one experienced in Bethel. This article highlights some
things happening in Bethel, Alaska now as a result of the school
shooting there in 1997: children are being allowed to share common
feelings and to discuss them. Students in Bethel are processing
through the heartache produced by the school shooting. Under the
broad, possible interpretation of this legislation, that program
would be in conflict. The article shows specific examples of how
that might be interpreted as in conflict of this legislation.
MS. SHOBER expressed concern regarding the counseling needs of
high-risk students in the schools. Often counselors and teaching
staff find it difficult to gain written permission from parents or
guardians of those students who are displaying the greatest need
for intervention. This population certainly may not make up the
bulk of students receiving services, however, their needs may be
more extreme. Although several attempts are often made to reach
these families to secure written permission, the follow-through on
the part of the family is very difficult at times. Counseling
staff may feel compelled to intervene on behalf of the student
after making a good-faith effort to reach and receive written
parental permission without success. Even after services begin in
schools, counseling staff continues to attempt to include family
members in the services that are being provided. Examples of these
services could be anger management, good decision making and risk
reduction, refusal skills, and so on. If the assessment by a
trained counselor determines that the student is in need of more
intensive therapeutic intervention, he will refer the student to
the appropriate agencies outside of the school building. None of
those assessments or those counseling services could be provided
under the possible interpretation of this legislation.
Number 1364
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON gathered that she was referring to Section 1 (a)
where it refers to written consent for psychological testing.
MS. SHOBER answered yes, in part through the counseling concern,
that would be the case.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the logical inference from DOE's
perspective would be that, in addition to providing education, the
school should be able to provide counseling, for example,
psychological treatment, without the parent's permission.
MS. SHOBER believes the DOE is saying, dependant upon the
interpretation of the words, that students are exhibiting behaviors
that are not allowing them to sit and participate in a regular
classroom structure. For example, in the article, elementary
students are dealing with lots of anger management and social
skills that don't make it possible for them to participate in the
regular curricular activities. Lots of times counseling staff will
attempt to intervene and help that student get back on track. The
attempt to make contact with parents before they try to do anything
with the child may be the cause of some of these problems. It has
come to the attention of the department that often times it is not
possible to get written permission. Parents have the form but
forget to send it in; follow-up phone calls don't result in getting
the written permission back. The bottom line is the student is
left without any kind of intervention services; the class is left
struggling with how to incorporate the behavior into the curricular
day; and the counselors are trying to intervene on behalf of the
student to help assist in any way they can.
MS. SHOBER agreed that intensive psychotherapy is not the role of
a school counselor, but often times in those kinds of assessments
in helping students get back on track with their behavior problems
or social interaction problems, it comes forth that there are some
other problems that are evident that are in need of greater
psychological help. That is when the counselor would work with the
family to refer to an agency outside of the school.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON sees the dilemma and is trying to help. He
doesn't want the school doing any heavy-duty psychological
counseling with the student without the parents' knowledge.
Finally, if the parents refuse to get involved, there may be a
child in need of aid. The parents who it is the most difficult to
get permission from and get them involved are often the ones that
have the students who need the most assistance. He asked Ms.
Shober if the school got permission at enrollment for the school
counselor to be able to interact with the student, would that help
her concerns.
MS. SHOBER believes that would answer some of the concerns.
Number 1082
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked what is the alternative to having the
counselor not intervening in those situations when the students are
off track.
MS. SHOBER said it depends case by case because every student is
different. Students who are unable to cooperate, share, listen,
stop harassing or hitting their neighbors, playground harassment,
fighting, the DOE feels those type of behaviors are destructive to
the overall academic success of students. They are attempting with
schools to offer every kind of assistance possible to change those
behaviors.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked what happens in schools without those
intervention services.
Number 0972
MS. SHOBER said each district has adopted its own discipline plan
so it varies. Some districts don't have the staff to do anything
at this point, and they are barely getting by. Other districts
have very extensive programs and immediately help those students.
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL commented that when any counseling goes on, the
parents are encouraged or involved at a very early level.
MS. SHOBER indicated that there is always the attempt to make
contact with those parents and help discuss and offer help in a
variety of ways. The concern is many times the parents are not
responding when the student is having difficulty during the school
day and they are struggling to work out the conflicting pieces.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON referred to page 2, line 30 (e) "Written consent
required under (a) of this section is valid until the commencement
of the subsequent school year," and commented that his reading of
the legislation is that all the things on page 1 are covered. He
told Ms. Shober if she gets a legal opinion that he is wrong, and
it doesn't cover her concerns, he will call this back to the
committee to amend it.
Number 0735
DOUGLAS GARDNER, Assistant Attorney General, Oil, Gas and Mining
Section, Civil Division (Juneau), Department of Law, came forward
to testify representing the Departments of Law and Health and
Social Services DHSS, Division of Family and Youth Services DFYS.
He doesn't represent the Department of Education, but he offered to
attempt to answer any questions the committee may have. He
reviewed the CS with the DFYS and they had some problems with
subsections (h) and (i) so he offered an amendment to clarify the
problem. He doesn't believe it was Co-Chairman Dyson's intention
to give an opportunity of different interpretation of some of the
reports-of-harm requirements in AS 47. The two departments
proposed that subsections (h) and (i) be scaled down to just (h).
The focus of (h) would be to track AS 47.17.020 and AS 47.17.027
which are the reporting requirements that school officials are well
trained to follow. It is the department's view that these
subsections might give a court pause and there are long-term
interpretations that they wouldn't want to see upset.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Gardner to show them exactly where the
wording differs.
Number 0520
MR. GARDNER replied that they essentially added the underlined
language and took out the language in capital letters and brackets.
He said he wasn't sure what the legislation was trying to achieve,
they made the assumption that Co-Chairman Dyson was trying to track
the normal reporting requirements in AS 47.17 and wasn't trying to
change those, and in (i) he was trying to make it clear that the
DHSS is exempted from notification requirements.
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained they didn't want this parental
permission to keep the department from reporting a child in need of
aid.
MR. GARDNER said they just wanted to be clear that the reporting
requirements haven't been changed, and they changed the language to
use the language in the existing statute.
Number 0402
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Gardner to comment if they are on the
right track in regards to the concerns expressed by Ms. Shober.
MR. GARDNER said he isn't familiar with that area. He would have
to follow up later.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked for clarification on some of the deleted
language.
TAPE 99-38, SIDE A
MR. GARDNER answered that the deletion of some of the language in
subsection (h) was done because that issue has been addressed in
other statutes. He explained that there are situations that need
to be reported to the DHSS or law enforcement agencies and not to
the parents.
Number 0110
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, which read:
(h) Unless the matter must be reported to the Department
of Health and Social Services under AS 47.17.020 or the
records or information were received in the course of an
investigation by that department under AS 47.17.027, a
school employee or agent who believes that a situation
exists [IF, AFTER RECEIVING RECORDS OR INFORMATION, A
SCHOOL EMPLOYEE OR AGENT BELIEVES THAT A SITUATION
EXISTS] that presents a serious threat to the well-being
of a student, the school employee or agent shall notify
the student's parent or guardian without delay. [IF,
HOWEVER, THE MATTER HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THE STUDENT'S PARENT OR
GUARDIAN OF ANY POSSIBLE INVESTIGATION BEFORE THE
STUDENT'S RETURN HOME FORM SCHOOL.]
[(I) THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES MAY BE
EXEMPTED FROM THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN
(H) OF THIS SECTION ONLY IF THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES
THAT THE STUDENT WOULD BE ENDANGERED BY NOTIFICATION OF
THE STUDENT'S PARENT OR GUARDIAN OR IF THIS NOTIFICATION
IS OTHERWISE PROHIBITED BY STATE OR FEDERAL LAW.]
CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There
being none, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 0160
CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON stated that he is committed that if Ms. Shober or
Mr. Gardner find anything that needs to be fixed in this
legislation, it will be fixed. If there is an unintended result of
this legislation and it ends up being an insurmountable barrier to
getting the survey done, he is committed to fixing any problems.
It is not his intention to mess things up.
Number 0381
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move the proposed CSHB 70,
version 1-LSO263\G, Ford, 4/6/99, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. There
being no objection, CSHB 70(HES) moved from the House Health,
Education and Social Services Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0412
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 4:51 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|