Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/20/1998 03:17 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
March 20, 1998
3:17 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chairman
Representative Joe Green, Vice Chairman
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative Tom Brice
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Al Vezey
Representative J. Allen Kemplen
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
* HOUSE BILL NO. 384
"An Act establishing the Legislative Commission on Family Law
Reform; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 375
"An Act relating to children in need of aid matters and
proceedings; relating to murder of children, criminally negligent
homicide, kidnapping, criminal nonsupport, the crime of indecent
exposure, and the crime of endangering the welfare of a child;
relating to registration of certain sex offenders; relating to
sentencing for certain crimes involving child victims; relating to
the state medical examiner and reviews of child fatalities;
relating to teacher certification and convictions of crimes
involving child victims; relating to access, confidentiality, and
release of certain information concerning the care of children,
child abuse and neglect, and child fatalities; authorizing the
Department of Health and Social Services to enter into an
interstate compact concerning adoption and medical assistance for
certain children with special needs; authorizing the establishment
of a multidisciplinary child protection team to review reports of
child abuse or neglect; relating to immunity from liability for
certain state actions concerning matters involving child protection
and fatality reviews and children in need of aid; relating to
persons required to report suspected child abuse or neglect;
relating to foster care placement and to payment for children in
foster and other care and the waiver of certain foster care
requirements; relating to the access to certain criminal justice
information and licensure of certain child care facilities;
amending Rule 218, Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure; amending
Rules 1, 3, 15, 18, and 19, Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 384
SHORT TITLE: LEGISLATIVE COM. ON FAMILY LAW REFORM
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) HODGINS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/06/98 2239 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
2/06/98 2239 (H) HES, JUDICIARY
3/12/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/12/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/20/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 375
SHORT TITLE: CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN/FOSTER CARE
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/02/98 2200 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
2/02/98 2201 (H) HES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE
2/02/98 2201 (H) INDETERMINATE FN (GOV/VARIOUS DEPTS)
2/02/98 2201 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
2/26/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
2/26/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/03/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/03/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/05/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/05/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/12/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
3/12/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
3/20/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 110
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Telephone: (907) 465-3779
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as sponsor of HB 384.
DIANA BUFFINGTON, Chairman
Alaska Task Force on Family Law Reform
317 Maple
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-2290
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384 and in
opposition to HB 375.
WILLIAM PHILLIPS
Address Not provided
Missouri
Telephone: (471) 938-4423
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
ROCKY GRIMES
P.O. Box 2975
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 262-5483
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384 and in
opposition to HB 375.
CAROL PALMER
P.O. Box 2402
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 746-2863
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
WALTER GAUTHIER
Box 2246
Homer, Alaska 99603
Telephone: (907) 235-2809
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384 and in
opposition to HB 375.
SUZETTE GRAHAM
P.O. Box 383
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 776-8658
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
DEBBIE NELSON
P.O. Box 1064
Sterling, Alaska 99672
Telephone: Not Provided
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384 and in
opposition to HB 375.
CINDY HOUSER
HC 2, Box 596
Kasilof, Alaska 99610
Telephone: (907) 262-7937
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
CHRIS HUTCHINSON
P.O. Box 1323
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 283-2296
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384 and in
opposition to HB 375.
MARTHA HODSON, Representative
Guardians of Family Rights
P.O. Box 3687
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 260-9156
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
KAREN LEONARD
310 West 76th, Number C
Anchorage, Alaska 99518
Telephone: (907) 522-9268
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
YOLANDA BOMA
11640 Northern Raven, Number 1
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
Telephone: (907) 348-0715
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 384.
SUSAN WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General
Human Services Section
Civil Division
Department of Law
1031 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1994
Telephone: (907) 269-5100
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 375.
RUSSELL WEBB, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0601
Telephone: (907) 354-3030
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 375.
DEAN GUANELI, Chief Assistant Attorney General
Legal Services Section
Criminal Division
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
Telephone: (907) 465-3428
POSITION STATEMENT: Addressed HB 375.
DEBORAH DOWNS, Social Worker
and Program Officer
Division of Family and Youth Services
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 1089
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Telephone: (907) 772-2863
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
WILLARD S. ELLIS, Trooper
Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety
P.O. Box 190
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
Telephone: (907) 772-3100
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
GENE ALTIG
4396 Al Cory Road
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-4216
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
ANITA ALVES
Office of Public Advocacy
900 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone: (907) 269-3500
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 375.
JANE BURCHARD
4222 Chena Hot Springs Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99712
Telephone: (907) 488-8371
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
GERALDINE BROWN
P.O. Box 74552
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 451-8042
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
HARRY NIEHAUS
P.O. Box 55455
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-9328
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
CHARLES ROLLINS
1403 Old Richardson Highway
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-9030
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
BETTY ROLLINS
P.O. Box 55163
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-6614
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
PAUL NELSON
Address Not Provided
Haines, Alaska
Telephone: (907) 766-2458
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
SCOTT CALDER
P.O. Box 75011
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707
Telephone: (907) 474-0174
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
PAMELA SCOTT
3605 Williams Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
Telephone: (907) 561-1126
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
DON DAPCEVICH, Executive Director
State Advisory Board on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 110608
Juneau, Alaska 99801-0608
Telephone: (907) 465-8920
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 375.
JAYNE ANDREEN, Executive Director
Council on Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault
Department of Public Safety
P.O. Box 111200
Juneau, Alaska 99811-1200
Telephone: (907) 465-4356
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 375.
LAUREE HUGONIN, Director
Alaska Network on Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault
130 Seward Street, Room 501
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-3650
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-28, SIDE A
Number 0008
CHAIRMAN CON BUNDE called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:17 p.m. Members
present at the call to order were Representatives Bunde, Porter,
Dyson and Brice. Representative Green arrived at 3:25 p.m.
Representatives Kemplen and Vezey were absent.
HB 384 - LEGISLATIVE COM. ON FAMILY LAW REFORM
Number 0045
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the first item on the agenda was HB 384,
"An Act establishing the Legislative Commission on Family Law
Reform; and providing for an effective date." He asked
Representative Hodgins to present his bill.
Number 0064
REPRESENTATIVE MARK HODGINS, Alaska State Legislature, Sponsor of
HB 384, said this legislation, HB 384, will create a legislative
commission to track new regulations concerning child and family
issues, gather testimony on statutes and regulations already in
force and fine tune them, and suggest draft legislation to create
a statewide family court and other needed child protection laws.
He said in looking at the situation with the Division of Family and
Youth Services (DFYS) and other agencies involved in child
protection, this commission would help guide and review the various
proposals being discussed this legislative session. The commission
consisting of three senators and three representatives would guide
future legislation as he is of the opinion this legislature would
not be able to address every issue that needs to be fixed. He
acknowledged that many people don't like commissions and he agrees,
but additional legislation will be required on the child protection
issues. This legislation includes reviewing a family court system
which may not be cost efficient, but he believed it needed to be
looked at. He stated Diana Buffington has been instrumental in the
formation of House Bill 384 and asked the committee's indulgence in
allowing her to comment at this time.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Ms. Buffington to present her comments.
Number 0248
DIANA BUFFINGTON, Chairman, Alaska Task Force on Family Law Reform,
testified via teleconference from Kodiak, stating the family law
process in Alaska and elsewhere is broken and needs major fixing.
Governors, agency employees, mediators, judges, counselors and
citizens all agreed the current system is too court-oriented and
too confrontational to meet the needs of most families. She said
families live in a reality-based world while agencies of the state
do not. Most cases in family law in Alaska are prepared as if
going to court when only a small percentage actually do. She
stated the Child Support Enforcement Agency (CSED) and the DFYS are
the two most complained about agencies in the state, respectively.
Many clients complain of violations of civil rights and due process
of law. She said this legislation will bring a family oriented and
family based common sense back to these agencies. She said, "The
task force that we headed up included persons here in the state of
Alaska and included people all over the United States who were
involved in child protective services, helping persons going
through separation and divorce, and establishing parentage and we
find that a nonadversarial system will go a lot farther instead of
having to be so adversarial as these agencies currently are."
MS. BUFFINGTON pointed out the duties of the commission established
by this legislation would be to review all current laws, practices
and policies of the CSED, the DFYS, the court system, the custody
investigators offices and the guardian ad litem program. She
stressed it is important that individuals elected to the
legislature understand the current laws and practices of the
agencies. Oftentimes, laws are passed by legislators without
understanding the effects on people down the line. Currently,
CSED and DFYS are far out of balance and out of compliance with
state and federal law. Another duty of the commission is to help
prepare legislation and assist legislators in submitting a report
of finding of proposed legislation. She said it's important for
the commission to review the establishment of a family court of
law. A family court of law previously existed, but it was
dissolved under Judge Johnstone because it was too costly to the
state. She noted the buzz words in much of the legislation
relating to child protective services are "kid time." She agreed
that kid time was important but when kid time is put at the bottom
of criminal hearings and the criminal process in the superior
court, kid time gets put off. It's time to get back on real time
and have a family court of law. Most states have a family court of
law to deal with issues that are family-based, family-oriented,
child custody and visitation, child support and anything else
resembling a family matter. A family court of law could also
address emergency hearings for domestic violence instead of having
so many ex parte orders which are in violation of civil rights.
She agrees that stronger laws are needed, but Alaska needs laws
that are narrowly definable and with more specificity.
Number 0604
MS. BUFFINGTON urged the committee to pass HB 384. She stressed it
was time to bring Alaska up to the level of, if not exceed, other
states in family law.
Number 0646
CHAIRMAN BUNDE remarked it appears the commission established in
HB 384 is a duplication of what legislators currently do and an
expansion of government. He asked Ms. Buffington how she would
balance a request for an expansion of government with the
frequently expressed need to reduce the role of government in an
individual's life.
MS. BUFFINGTON said currently the legislature receives a number of
calls per week concerning the CSED, the DFYS, the custody
investigators' office or the guardian ad litem program which
requires many staff hours dealing with these complaints.
Additionally, an exorbitant amount of money is being spent on
auditing the DFYS and CSED. These agencies need to be brought into
line and the money they spend should be based on their performance.
She didn't see that happening and instead the agencies always want
more money and more staff, while states comparable to Alaska are
spending less money, have less staff and do a better job in family
law areas. This legislation will put an end to all the extraneous
spending and will allow time for clients to express how these two
agencies interact with and impact clients.
Number 0793
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS reiterated the commission was made up of
three senators and three representatives with the thought in mind
that it's the legislature's duty to solve problems. There is a
problem in child protection currently and he believes it's wise to
form a commission that would work with the Administration at
problem resolution within the confines of the departments. He also
believed the family court system should be revisited to determine
if it's cost efficient. He said it's time to review some of the
problems with the child protection system and in his opinion, it's
appropriate for the legislature to staff the commission that would
be making the recommendations.
Number 0866
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said this bill appears to be a duplication of a
legislator's current job and it seems to assume that the six
legislators appointed to this commission would somehow be
sensitive, more concerned or more opposed to the management of the
DFYS.
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS explained last summer when he became
involved with the DFYS situation, he found that several of his
colleagues were referring people to him because of his active
interest. This bill, by laying out specific areas needing to be
addressed, makes the commission task orientated. He noted this
legislation is unnecessary if the Senate President and Speaker of
the House appoint a committee to review and come up with
suggestions. He found that he, working as a legislator without a
committee structure, didn't have the credibility with some of the
departments who felt they needed to come through the HESS Committee
or the Children's Caucus and that was not solving his problem.
Number 0979
REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE said the proposed commission would
recommend and prepare legislation to create a nonadversarial
conflict management system for families, and yet the very nature of
these issues are full of conflict and emotion. With that in mind,
he asked Representative Hodgins to explain what kind of a system he
had in mind.
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS said when he came forward with the concept
of this bill, he had not seen HB 375 and acknowledges there are
some areas of HB 375 that address the adversarial issue such as the
multi-disciplinary teams and the child protection teams. He
explained these are natural areas for this commission to review;
however, if some areas are covered in other legislation, the
commission could devote less time to those areas and more time in
others.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced William Phillips was standing by to
testify offnet from Missouri.
Number 1047
WILLIAM PHILLIPS testified offnet from Missouri, in favor of
HB 384. He has experienced problems with the Alaska Child Support
Enforcement Agency for about the past five years. He explained he
has been paying double child support, but the CSED wouldn't
acknowledge it. He has experienced a number of problems with CSED
and is of the opinion the laws need to be reviewed and revamped.
Agencies like CSED need to listen to both sides; it's taken five
years for CSED to finally review his side of the case. He
reiterated his support for this proposed legislation.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Phillips and asked Mr. Grimes to testify
at this time.
Number 1112
ROCKY GRIMES testified via teleconference from Kenai in support of
HB 384. He stated he's been paying child support timely for the
past 13 years, and there was a modification effective February
1997. Because it appeared it to be inevitable there would be an
increase, he began paying the extra money immediately which
amounted to about $90. The extra money was sent back to him along
with a support payment for his monthly obligation. A couple of
weeks later he was contacted by his child's mother announcing the
child support payment had not arrived. After several unreturned
phone calls to CSED, he finally figured out the agency had sent
back the extra money plus the support payment. When the agency
asked him to return the payment, they charged interest even though
it was their fault. The agency continued to return the extra money
submitted. Finally, when the Attorney General's Office sent a bill
it included interest on all arrearages back to February 1997
despite the fact he had indeed paid and CSED had returned it to
him. After several discussions, the interest was waived. He has
been given conflicting information from staff which is indicative
of the need for additional training. He reiterated his support for
this legislation.
Number 1221
CHAIRMAN BUNDE agreed that far too many complaints are received
about Child Support Enforcement Division. He said if this bill
passed, the commission would exist for two years. He wondered if
Mr. Grimes viewed it as an ombudsman-type commission where he could
have taken his complaint about CSED.
MR. GRIMES said he didn't look at it so much in that direction,
although it would be an important factor; he would like the option
to (indisc.) the commission in and request that a state audit be
done on his particular case. He hoped this commission would do
routine quality control as well, not just act as an ombudsman-type
agency, although that's an important issue as well.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Grimes for his testimony and asked Carol
Palmer to submit her remarks.
Number 1279
CAROL PALMER testified via teleconference from Mat-Su in support of
HB 384. She suggested the commission be expanded to perhaps
include an attorney specializing in family matters and a couple of
parents who have experience in dealing with the agencies. She
agreed with Diana Buffington's comments on the family court system
and added that family court mediation, which has been successful in
Rock County, Wisconsin, would perhaps be a better idea.
Number 1341
WALTER GAUTHIER testified from Homer via teleconference in favor of
HB 384. He referred to Chairman Bunde's previous remark on the
expansion of government and said the Domestic Violence Prevention
Act passed by the legislature in 1996 contained provisions
redefining a lot of violence and exposure to violence in the home
in terms of child abuse. Due to the passage of that legislation,
in one year the Child in need of Aid (CINA) court cases for
superior court in Anchorage increased 60 percent and 25 percent
statewide. He believed a family court would alleviate some of the
caseload for the superior court system and that some of these cases
could be adjudicated through mediation, as suggested by the
previous speaker.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Gauthier for his remarks and asked
Suzette Graham to testify.
Number 1389
SUZETTE GRAHAM testified via teleconference from Kenai, reiterating
the remarks of Ms. Buffington. As a foster parent, she believes
this legislation would help hold accountable some of the offices
involved in child protection and it would rectify some of the
concerns she has. She noted that a lot of child protection cases
are put on hold for criminal cases in the court and by giving
criminal cases precedence, it means a child in a foster home is put
off even longer. She suggested that an ombudsman-type agency for
foster parents would be very helpful.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if Ms. Graham felt that talking with her
Senator or Representative wasn't adequate and that something more
was needed.
MS. GRAHAM replied it would be nice to have a centralized group
that focused just on these issues. Legislators are busy dealing
with issues in many different areas, whereas this group could
devote their time to just these areas.
Number 1459
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE pointed out for teleconference participants
the state has an ombudsman office through the Legislative Branch
which can be contacted regarding these issues and that office will
go through the investigatory process to determine if things were
done appropriately or not.
Number 1482
REPRESENTATIVE HODGINS said it's important to realize the regular
duties of a legislator in responding to constituent complaints or
concerns would still be available. This commission would actually
focus more on solving longer range, bigger problems than an
individual legislator would do in responding to constituent
concerns.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Debbie Nelson to testify at this time.
Number 1519
DEBBIE NELSON testified via teleconference from Kenai. She's a
foster parent and is definitely in support of HB 384.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Nelson for commenting and called on
Cindy Houser to comment.
Number 1530
CINDY HOUSER testified via teleconference from Kenai. She, too, is
a foster parent and supports HB 384.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Houser and asked Chris Hutchinson to
testify next.
Number 1540
CHRIS HUTCHINSON testified from Kenai via teleconference. She said
in light of the upcoming audits of the Division of Family and Youth
Services and Mental Health, the establishment of this commission is
critical. She said, "The DFYS has been a pain for we don't know
how many years and right now we're looking at $31 million headed
our way for three years - the only requirement of the state is to
match $7 million according to Fran Ulmer last night. Now we need
to get this straightened out before we start siphoning that $31
million into the mess we've got." In her opinion what is needed is
a family law court and some accountability for the DFYS; not more
immunity. She urged the committee to pass HB 384.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE referenced the $31 million of Medicaid funds and
said $7 million will be used as matching funds for creating more
Medicaid for making people eligible, particularly children, who
live up to 200 percent above the poverty line, but the rest of the
money will not go to the DFYS.
Number 1630
MARTHA HODSON, Representative, Guardians of Family Rights,
testified via teleconference from Kenai in support of HB 384. She
related her personal experience with the Child Support Enforcement
Division. She requested a modification several times and finally
after several years, they made her ex-husband prove what his
earnings were even though she had submitted tax forms, W-2s, and so
on. Then when she had only one child left at home, CSED finally
made him prove what he made. She asked that it be made retroactive
which is in accordance with the law, so now CSED has money paid by
her ex-husband and she's having a difficult time getting it. She
said even though her child is now grown, it's her money; her ex-
husband was ordered to pay it and he paid it directly out of his
check. She still runs into a brick wall every time she talks with
CSED.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Hodson for her remarks and asked Karen
Leonard to present her remarks.
Number 1683
KAREN LEONARD testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
support of HB 384. She favored the idea of having a committee of
legislators keeping an eye on child protective services to ensure
the laws are being implemented in accordance with the intent of the
law. She has often heard comments that the courts, the DFYS, or
the CSED are missing the point and this legislation would provide
for a review of laws and regulations to ensure they are on track.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Leonard for her comments and asked
Yolanda Boma to present her testimony.
Number 1763
YOLANDA BOMA testified via teleconference from Anchorage in support
of HB 384 in its entirety.
Number 1775
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if there were other individuals wishing to
testify on HB 384. There being no additional persons, Chairman
Bunde announced HB 384 would be held in committee for further
review and brought up at a later date.
HB 375 - CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN/FOSTER CARE
Number 1797
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the next bill before the committee was
HB 375. He asked Susan Wibker from the Department of Law and Russ
Webb from the Department of Health & Social Services to come
forward. He noted there were a number of people in Juneau and on
teleconference waiting to testify on this bill.
Number 1868
CHAIRMAN BUNDE explained the committee's role is to research the
child protection issues. There seems to be a pattern of problems
the public is experiencing with child in need of aid cases and with
the Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS). Historically,
the legislature has met the requirements of the department for
funding, but the problems are continuing. It's important to
understand the cause of the problem and how this particular
legislation or any other legislation might address the problems.
The committee is also attempting to get a better idea of the
management practices within the department. The legislature cannot
fix all the problems, but can address some of the proposed
legislative fixes such as HB 375. His plan was to address specific
questions about HB 375 followed by public testimony.
Number 1936
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Ms. Wibker to address the issue of immunity
for DFYS in HB 375.
Number 1936
SUSAN WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General, Human Services Section,
Civil Division, Department of Law, said the public has expressed
repeated concern that DFYS has all the control, but no
accountability. She reminded everyone of the judicial oversight
and control of the cases by the court system, so the department is
accountable to the courts. There's also a review committee in the
Department of Administration, external to DFYS, that serves a
review function. The Division of Family and Youth Services is
subject to an annual federal audit wherein federal auditors review
randomly selected files for compliance with federal law. If found
to be in noncompliance, the state loses federal funds. In
addition, there are several teams such as the placement review
team, foster care review team and permanency planning committee
that operate both external and internal to the DFYS, reviewing
decisions made in the division. Additionally, the legislative
audit of the division has just been completed and released. So
when she hears comments like no accountability, no review, all DFYS
control and no oversight, she feels compelled to point out there
are a number of ways in which the department is audited and
subjected to oversight.
Number 2012
MS. WIBKER said with respect to immunity, the Division of Family
and Youth Services has no more or no less immunity than any other
public servant. It is her understanding that government officials
- policeman, fireman, paramedic, social worker - are allowed to
make good faith mistakes, but are not allowed to make malicious,
intentional, deliberate acts that would be detrimental. Based on
conversations with tort attorneys, she understands it really
doesn't matter what the bill says; there is a level of governmental
immunity which applies across the board.
Number 2041
CHAIRMAN BUNDE observed that perhaps it shouldn't be included in
the legislation if it doesn't matter and it's causing people some
angst.
MS. WIBKER responded, "If you don't say it, my understanding is
there's a -- public servants all have a comparable level." She
thought perhaps the public was assuming the language infers the
DFYS cannot be sued or held accountable in a civil suit, but that's
not the case; the DFYS gets sued and whether the language is
included in the legislation or not, that's going to happen.
Number 2069
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER asked what portion of the bill Ms.
Wibker was referring to.
MS. WIBKER directed him to page 42, line 27, which states, "Nothing
in this title creates a duty or standard of care ...." She thought
this language was generating the public concern.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented, "While we need laws that are equitably
applied, there is, I guess in the legal profession, the appearance
of justice as well as the actuality of justice and we need to be
aware of that."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER commented he had conducted research on a bill
establishing these kinds of protections for public employees in
general and it is his understanding that public employees are, by
policy, protected or indemnified, but not immune.
MS. WIBKER said she's not a tort attorney and couldn't speak to
that issue.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER continued that the state, as well as some
municipalities, will defend any employee that is sued for a tort
and indemnify their action assuming it was something done in the
normal course of business; not gross or intentional.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE explained that he's bringing up questions that have
been raised in public testimony and this issue will continue to be
explored by the committee.
Number 2184
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN said, "You said there had been repeated
audits and under current law is there a waiver of duty - is this
implying or this portion is taking away something that there is now
so that negligence could be brought under current law that this
would evade because there's no duty established?"
MS. WIBKER suggested the committee ask that a tort attorney be
present at the next hearing to respond to those issue inasmuch as
this language was drafted by the tort attorneys.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if any of the audits had identified any
of these situations as a problem area or a potential problem area.
MS. WIBKER replied she wasn't aware of any, but deferred the
question to Mr. Webb.
Number 2228
RUSSELL WEBB, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Health & Social
Services, said he was not aware that the focus was on a particular
case or a particular act of wrong doing in any of the audits. He
added the division commonly faces about four to five civil suits
annually, not all of which are found justified.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked of the four to five civil suits
annually, do any relate to some type of negligence as opposed to a
tort of intent.
MR. WEBB did not have an answer to that question.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said, "I'm just wondering why this -- this
seems like this is going beyond, for the department, what would be
held otherwise in private sector - they can't waive their duty."
MS. WIBKER responded, "Based on my recent discussion with the tort
attorneys, they are the ones that represent the agency and the
claims - they deal with the claims - they are almost external to
the agency. There were some recent Supreme Court Opinions that
came down from civil suits and they used some of the language in
those opinions to develop this."
MR. WEBB pointed out for the committee the purpose of the language
is certainly not, on the part of the department, to evade its
responsibilities or accountability, but simply to make certain the
department is not subject to frivolous lawsuits or that employees
have no protection and therefore, the department would be unable to
get employees. He said that's a critical issue.
Number 2316
REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON advised a couple of tort attorneys had
visited with him and his staff and as he recalls, the attorneys
indicated they would have no problem with everything after the
first sentence being deleted in Section 47. He said, "And as I
understand it, the 47.14.985 - that sentence is there, I think in
a defensive sense to not establish -- I think that they're worried
about Cleary kinds of things where they might be sued if, you know
optimum conditions that a child finds itself in are not being met."
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said in his opinion, the first line is a
precaution to make sure that higher standards aren't set for these
employees than would be for any other public or private sector
employees.
TAPE 98-28, SIDE B
Number 0009
CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted there had been public concern expressed about
the language in Section 1 on page 2 recognizing children as
individuals having legal rights. He asked if that had changed from
previous legislation.
MS. WIBKER referred to page 2, lines 11-16 and said the department
isn't proposing this be law; it's designed to guide the courts in
the interpretation of the law.
Number 0040
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked if the department would be opposed to
a Finding that children are individuals who have a right of
expectation of freedom and so forth as opposed to establishing a
right.
MS. WIBKER said the Department of Law tort attorneys reviewed this
section as well as the immunity section and offered their advice on
how it should be drafted.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER speculated the second half of the immunity
portion may not remain in the bill.
MS. WIBKER said she expected the tort attorneys would advise that
if language was removed from the immunity section, this section
would also need to be revised; the two sections go hand in hand.
Number 0084
CHAIRMAN BUNDE next referred to the criminal nonsupport section of
the HB 375 and asked if that section is essential to this
legislation or would it be better addressed in another piece of
legislation.
MS. WIBKER stated where it's addressed is certainly not as
important as the fact that it is addressed. The criminal
nonsupport provision is in the bill because it's viewed as part of
child protection and preventing child neglect in the current
climate of welfare reform, welfare to work. She noted there are
children whose ability to be covered by welfare is time limited and
the only safety net for many of those children will be child
support collection. It's designed to help fill a gap.
Number 0126
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Ms. Wibker to define criminal nonsupport as
opposed to nonsupport.
MS. WIBKER deferred that question to Dean Guaneli.
Number 0148
DEAN GUANELI, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services
Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law, said "Let me phrase
it in terms of the elements needed to prove a criminal case of
nonsupport. First, we would need to prove that the person who owed
the support was aware of the support order. Second, that the
person failed to pay support and really the most important is the
person had the ability to pay the support; either that the person
had assets, was hiding assets, or was able to be gainfully employed
and was simply not looking for work or not being gainfully
employed. That third element is really the crucial one. It's not
simply falling behind in payments - we know that people all the
time fall behind, but it's more really in making good faith
efforts. It's you've got the ability to pay and you simply refuse
to do so."
CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented in his mind, the most egregious is the
hiding of assets.
MR. GUANELI said it happens on a fairly regular basis that assets
are hidden.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the committee would begin to take public
testimony at this time.
Number 0222
CHRIS HUTCHINSON testified from Kenai via teleconference in
opposition to HB 375. She said with respect to immunity, the state
is already covered under Title 9 and additional coverage isn't
needed under Title 47; it's helpful for the state but not for the
people. She said a multi-disciplinary is unnecessary; it's staffed
with all professionals and no lay persons. As Mr. Webb testified
previously, that information is not available to the prosecutors to
get back at the criminal, so what purpose does this team serve.
Number 0271
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if Ms. Hutchinson would have less opposition
if the bill was crafted in such a manner that information would be
available to prosecutors and law enforcement.
MS. HUTCHINSON responded that was just one of many concerns she has
with this legislation. She suggested a commission could be used to
review the entire area of child protection. The money will be
coming in over a three year period, so there's no real hurry to
revamp the DFYS, overturn Supreme Court decisions and so forth.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE pointed out this legislation has no connection to
the Medicaid money. He asked if witnesses would identify specific
fixes to the bill or to simply indicate there was no hope for the
entire bill. He thanked Ms. Hutchinson for her comments and asked
Mr. Grimes to present his testimony.
Number 0356
JOHNNY GRIMES testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 375. He noted that SB 272 was identical to
HB 375, and the Senate is not going to support SB 272 because it's
anti-father, big government and big spending.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Mr. Gauthier to present his comments on
HB 375.
Number 0494
WALTER GAUTHIER testified via teleconference from Homer. He
referred to a newspaper article wherein a person was writing to
Lynne Curry asking advice about an employment situation wherein a
counselor backhanded a child. He commented the counseling agency
has promised a good reference just to get rid of the counselor. He
questioned if this case of child felony assault was being
investigated by DFYS or any other agency.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE couldn't speak for the Division of Family and Youth
Services. He wasn't sure if something appearing in a newspaper is
considered a valid complaint of child abuse, but if Mr. Gauthier
wanted to make the charge, Chairman Bunde said he would insist the
division investigate.
MR. GAUTHIER said with respect to HB 375, he wanted to read the
following excerpts he received from Rick Toma (sp) concerning the
state of Illinois concerning the death of a child: "Subsequently,
the Governor and the legislature raced to outdo each other to see
who could write in the phrase 'the best interest of the child' in
its new legislation. They wrote it in 28 times into statute. In
1987, Illinois had 14,000 children in foster care; as of 1994, they
have 45,000 children in foster care. This best interest of the
child is not just another feel good social worker slogan. It is
specific legal language with specific consequences." If this bill
is enacted into law, he predicted the number of children in foster
care will double, along with a concurrent increase in demands for
so-called nonprofit service provider that is funded by the
government through the Department of Health & Social Services. He
stated this bill has no redeeming value; it is nothing more than
the expansion of a system whose biggest problem is the darkness of
confidentiality. No one can review anything DFYS does because it's
all confidential.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE spoke of the challenge facing the committee -
recently children have died of child abuse, children are born with
FAS and FAE, children are born to drug addicts and so on. The
committee is motivated to try and solve these problems and it's a
challenge to do that without trampling on a person's rights. He
said the committee would welcome any advice the public could offer.
MR. GAUTHIER said the system has plenty of power; the problem is a
monopoly of the system. If an agency budget is increased every
time there's a report of a child death, the agency need only ignore
certain situations purposefully.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if Mr. Gauthier was suggesting that DFYS is
killing children to make money.
MR. GAUTHIER said he is suggesting that DFYS is deliberately
leaving some children in situations they know will result in cases
which will make the newspapers.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Gauthier for his comments and asked Ms.
Downs to present her testimony.
Number 0744
DEBORAH DOWNS, Social Worker and Program Officer, Division of
Family and Youth Services, Department of Health & Social Services,
testified via teleconference from Petersburg in support of the
portion of HB 375 establishing the multi-disciplinary teams. Child
abuse investigators, such as herself, would greatly benefit from
having access to the resources that a multi-disciplinary team would
provide. She believed that emphasis should be placed on the term
"resource" versus review. As Ms. Wibker pointed out, there are
many reviews that evaluate different functions, but people in the
field need resources to do a better job relating to investigation
of child abuse. Although she is usually able to delineate when
doing an investigation whether an injury has occurred or a child is
at risk of harm, there are cases that have come to her attention
where those definitive lines are not as clear. That's when she
relies heavily on a multi-disciplinary team as she goes through the
investigation process. In her 25+ years experience in child
protection, she has relied on multi-disciplinary teams working
closely with law enforcement, prosecutors and medical personnel,
both in urban and rural settings. The two things she wanted to
stress to the committee for consideration were that by doing a
collaborative and coordinated approach to child abuse
investigations, the trauma to children is significantly minimized
and secondly, allowing the field personnel such as herself, to draw
on the expertise and experience of other people is a valuable
resource. She urged the committee to pass the section of HB 375
dealing with multi-disciplinary teams.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if Ms. Downs had a problem with information
from a multi-disciplinary team being made available to law
enforcement personnel in the case of criminal activity.
MS. DOWNS said she would hope that law enforcement would be an
active participant in the process and therefore, would have total
access to the information.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Downs for her comments and asked Ms.
Buffington to present her remarks at this time.
Number 0890
DIANA BUFFINGTON testified via teleconference from Kodiak. She
said, "I'd like to point out several things in this bill, Mr.
Chairman. Section 1 and a lot of this has been reviewed and put up
against the U.N. Children's Bill of Rights which was not, I repeat,
not ratified by the U.S. Congress, although the Children's Bill of
Rights (indisc.) by the U.N. looked on the outside, many of these
things - the ramifications of that bill -the reason Congress did
not pass it, is written up in this bill." She noted House Bill 375
will overturn several Supreme Court and Superior Court rulings that
she felt need to stay in place. She referred to Section 11
regarding criminal nonsupport and said public assistance is added
to a child support order and it would be very easy to get up to
$10,000 in criminal nonsupport. She noted there are over 53,000
child support cases in this state of which 30,000 are Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). She believed that
Representative Ryan and Senator Ellis had received information from
CSED indicating that anywhere from 39,000 to 49,000 cases are in
arrears and yet if CSED can pull some money out, they will
certainly file nonsupport. With respect to the immunity issue, she
said no one should have immunity and DFYS and CSED are good at
creating omission intentionally to win a favorable court review.
In conclusion, she said this bill needs to be defeated in its
entirety.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Buffington for her comments and asked
Debbie Nelson to present her remarks.
Number 1077
DEBBIE NELSON testified from Kenai via teleconference in opposition
to HB 375.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Nelson for her remarks and asked Trooper
Ellis to testify at this time.
Number 1111
WILLARD S. ELLIS, Trooper, Alaska State Troopers, Department of
Public Safety, testified via teleconference from Petersburg
regarding the multi-disciplinary teams. He's been a trooper for
17+ years working in Palmer, Cold Bay and Petersburg working child
investigations in all three locations. He's had specialized
training on child abuse investigation and sexual assault response
team training. He said the purpose of the team is to facilitate
civil investigations between two or more agencies over a specific
incident and the use of a team helps to protect a child from
further traumatization. By having the agencies work together as a
team, the victim isn't asked to tell the story to each agency at
different times. These teams are usually made up of an individual
from the police department, a social worker, a medical
professional, hopefully a victims' advocate and perhaps a
representative of the District Attorney's Office. He emphasized
the team is not for agency oversight; it's to protect the victim.
If the purpose of the team was to provide oversight of an agency,
he would be inclined to not participate on a team that wasn't to
protect the victim and help prosecute a case. With regard to the
district attorney being in charge of the team, he thought it should
be developed locally.
Number 1237
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked who had taken the leadership in setting
up the multi-disciplinary team in the rural areas.
TROOPER ELLIS replied it's been his experience that law enforcement
would take the leadership.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Trooper Ellis for commenting and asked Gene
Altig to comment.
Number 1256
GENE ALTIG testified from Fairbanks via teleconference and said
HB 375 can't work and should be scrapped. He added that juries
handle murder cases; not the DFYS.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented he didn't see anything in HB 375 that
would supplant the jury system or an investigation by law
enforcement. He thanked Mr. Altig for commenting and asked Anita
Alves to testify at this time.
Number 1311
ANITA ALVES, Office of Public Advocacy, testified via
teleconference from Anchorage in support of HB 375. She wanted to
briefly address the proposed changes to the court jurisdiction for
the child in need aid cases. She often represents delinquents as
an attorney and as a guardian ad litem and too many times she's sat
across from a young person awaiting court for angry acts of
property damage or assaultive behavior and listened to them
describe a childhood of anger and violence in their home. The
emotional harm to children that results from living with and
viewing acts of violence is devastating. The cost of treating
these children as teenagers, the cost of locking these children
away and the cost of the damage these children afflict on the state
is immense. The state needs to be able to intervene early in a
child's life when they are experiencing this type of emotional
harm, as well as when they are experiencing physical harm or
neglect. The time to act is when a child is young, working with
the family, providing resources that the child can live in that
family as long as it's a safe, stable home. Once the child becomes
a delinquent, it's often too late for the children and too late for
the family. Passing HB 375 will give these children a chance in
their life when they're young before it's too late.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Alves for testifying and asked Jane
Burchard if HB 375 should be fixed or scrapped.
Number 1417
JANE BURCHARD testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and said
HB 375 should be scrapped.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Geraldine Brown to present her comments.
Number 1433
GERALDINE BROWN testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and
urged the committee not to pass HB 375 or anything that gives the
DFYS any more power.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Brown and asked Harry Niehaus to
testify.
Number 1481
HARRY NIEHAUS testified from Fairbanks via teleconference in
opposition to HB 375. He referred to a Supreme Court case that has
granted social workers and others absolute quasi-judicial immunity;
they are immune to perjury, manufacturing evidence, et cetera. He
said, "Therefore, if we are to sue them, we have to do it in their
official and unofficial capacity." There has never been a
successful prosecution or suit against the agency.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE inquired if the state has ever been sued and the
people have prevailed.
MS. WIBKER said the DFYS gets sued five to six times a year and
yes, people do prevail.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented he would continue with the public
testimony and asked Charles Rollins if HB 375 should be fixed or
scrapped.
Number 1597
CHARLES ROLLINS testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and
said HB 375 should be scrapped. The bill is too long and is not
well written.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Betty Rollins to present her comments next.
Number 1686
BETTY ROLLINS testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in
opposition to HB 375. She said it attempts to cover far too many
issues.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced HB 375 would be heard again in committee
on Tuesday, March 24 but teleconference would be restricted to
listen only, as the committee would be addressing the issues.
Public testimony would again be taken once the committee has worked
on the bill.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Rollins for her comments and asked Paul
Nelson to present his statement.
Number 1773
PAUL NELSON testified offnet from Haines and said the Governor's
transmittal letter that accompanied HB 375 states, "More than
15,500 reports of child abuse or neglect were filed last year in
Alaska." He said while this may be true, the Governor does not
indicate how many of these reports were false nor how many
convictions actually occurred. Despite the comments that have been
made today, this bill seeks to grant total immunity to the DFYS.
Even the President of the United States is not immune from
prosecution; the DFYS should be responsible for their actions. He
related his personal experience of having no criminal record,
paying child support and not seeing his daughter for 11 years
because he refuses to incriminate himself. His civil rights are
violated, yet no Alaska court will even address the civil rights
issue. He said there are families that live in fear of the DFYS
and he requested the committee not grant DFYS more power by passing
HB 375.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Nelson for his testimony and asked Mr.
Calder to comment at this time.
Number 1910
SCOTT CALDER testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and agreed
with all the testimony presented against this bill. He said the
whole idea of the legislation is wrong. After years of problems
with people talking about children being kidnaped, injured while in
foster care, et cetera, nothing has ever been done to correct those
problems. The DFYS is an agency which, in combination with other
agencies, severely victimizes human beings in the state of Alaska
and until that's addressed he didn't think there could be any
discussion about spending more money on more promises.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE reiterated this bill does not propose to spend any
more money. He called Pamela Scott forward to present her
testimony.
Number 2023
PAMELA SCOTT said she was testifying on behalf of her son. She's
a new mother of six weeks; she brought her son home not from the
hospital, but from his tenth foster care placement. Her home will
be his permanent home. She wanted to address the termination of
parental rights section of HB 375. Her son is seven years old and
has never lived with his biological mother; however, the system is
set up so she has been able to maintain her parental rights,
although she hasn't provided for the child. She emphasized this
bill is about child protection and in all the testimony presented,
no one has talked about the voice of the child. She is enjoying
the possibility of being this child's mother for the remainder of
his minority life and this bill gives her that opportunity. She
said there are foster children who want permanent placement and
there are people who are capable and able to provide permanent care
homes - adoptive care as well as permanent guardianship for
children in the system - but children are not given that
opportunity because the way the system is set up now, the children
are not protected and parents are given too many rights. She said
there are things in this bill that are essential to protecting
children. Children need love, stability and consistency which they
can't get through foster care placement when they are moved from
place to place.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE on behalf of the committee congratulated Ms. Scott
on becoming a parent. He asked Don Dapcevich to come forward to
present his remarks.
Number 2258
DON DAPCEVICH, Executive Director, State Advisory Board on
Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, Department of Health & Social Services,
said he had been instructed by the board to come before the
committee to testify in support of HB 375. The board started off
having some misgivings about this bill; some of the issues dealt
with the seeming difference between 42 CFR, the federal
confidentiality rules, and this statute and there was also concern
about the disincentive for treatment for parents that was present
in the original bill. There is, however, a proposed amendment that
alleviates the fears of the board and they now support HB 375. He
said, "We try to walk that very delicate balance between ....
TAPE 98-29, SIDE A
Number 0007
MR. DAPCEVICH continued " .... parents. And the other side of that
is to get rid of those parents - get those parents out of the lives
of children when they refuse to or when they fail repeatedly to
respond to treatment - and you have to make those hard decisions
and I think this bill begins that process in getting to good
decisions with regard to protecting our children, which has to come
first."
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Dapcevich for his comments and called
Jayne Andreen forward to present her comments.
Number 0064
JAYNE ANDREEN, Executive Director, Council on Domestic Violence &
Sexual Assault, Department of Public Safety, said the council is
supportive of HB 375; it's definitely fixable. She said,
"Yesterday I talked about the increasing realization we have of the
impact that domestic violence has on children. We know that they
are too often primary victims of child abuse. We are starting to
also recognize and realize what an impact it has on them as
secondary victims - just being in the home where domestic violence
exists. One of the things I want to share with you is during the
Domestic Violence Summit, the children and youth focus group which
spent most of one day looking specifically at children and youth
issues and how that pertains to domestic violence, said
specifically that we need to define the emotional harm and include
in that the witnessing of domestic violence." She worked at the
front lines of domestic violence for 11 years in Alaska and her
greatest frustration with the DFYS was the fact they could never do
enough for far too many children and it had nothing to do with a
lack of compassion of the social workers; it had to do with a lack
of resources and the lack of appropriate laws and structure. She
thought this legislation does an excellent job of recrafting how
the state approaches the protection of children, which has to be
done. At the same time, it's important to be careful about how to
respond to children in situations where domestic violence exists.
Similar to Mr. Dapcevich's comments, the council also had some
concerns about HB 375, but is comfortable those concerns will be
addressed in the forthcoming amendment.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the committee would be addressing the
amendments the following Tuesday. He thanked Ms. Andreen for her
comments and asked Lauree Hugonin to come forward.
Number 0237
LAUREE HUGONIN, Director, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence &
Sexual Assault, said the network supports several sections of
HB 375; those relating to the child murder reclassification, the
redefining of indecent exposure, the increased sentencing for a
conviction of criminally negligent homicide when the victim is a
child, the revisions to the sex offender registration laws and the
development of the child and fatality review teams. She
specifically wanted to address the emotional harm when children
witness domestic violence and express some concerns the network has
with the legislation. She, too, felt confident the forthcoming
amendments will address the network's concerns.
MS. HUGONIN noted there have been several studies done to see the
tie-in between child abuse and domestic violence. A lot of the
research suggests that as many as 90 percent of children from
violent homes actually witness the abuse being perpetrated. One
study showed that some fathers deliberately arrange for their
children to witness the violence; other studies have shown violence
occurs only when the children are present. Unfortunately, male
children who witness the abuse of mothers by their fathers are more
likely to become men who batter the male children from homes where
there's violence. The decision to leave or stay often depends on
the mother's assessment of what will be in the best interest of her
children. Understanding the mother's reasoning and the many forces
that shape her decision is really important when looking at
ensuring safety for herself and her children. She informed the
committee of a couple of studies available in her office; the
American Bar Association study called "The Impact of Domestic
Violence on Children" and a study entitled "The Overlap Between
Child Maltreatment and Woman Abuse". She read the following
excerpts from "In the Best Interest of Women and Children; A Call
for Collaboration Between Child Welfare and Domestic Violence
Constituencies: "He hit me in the stomach when I was pregnant.
Then he threatened to beat my daughter and you don't ever hit my
kids. I tried before, but when it comes to my kids, no more." It
was found in this particular study that women would decide to leave
the home, not when necessarily the abuse was upon themselves, but
when they felt they could no longer protect their children. Other
studies have indicated that some women choose to remain in abusive
relationships in order to protect their children.
MS. HUGONIN stressed there's not this one easy answer to just leave
and the children will be safe or just stay and the children will be
safe; it's very situation specific. She said it's important to
realize that and to be careful when deciding what to do and how to
respond in child abuse cases. If a mother with no resources leaves
the home, she may not have a choice to be find shelter in a
situation that's less than ideal for children, so she may leave her
children with the abuser because there's a roof over their head,
they're getting fed and clothed and sometimes the Child Protection
Agency will step in and say she hasn't protected her child. On the
other hand if she stays, she may have that same failure to protect.
So in both situations, without proper training and experience and
carefully listening to what the adult victim is saying regarding
her best safety interest and that of her children, things can be
done which create more harm.
MS. HUGONIN stated that with the passage of the Domestic Violence
Act in 1996, the DFYS was required to start looking at adult
victims of domestic violence. If an adult victim of domestic
violence was observed while investigating a report of harm, the
DFYS case worker would get information and referrals to the adult
victim. It's important that all victims in the family and in the
situation be protected.
Number 0672
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Hugonin for her testimony.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced HB 375 would be held in committee and
heard the following Tuesday.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0704
CHAIRMAN BUNDE adjourned the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee at 5:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|