04/07/2011 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR7 | |
| HB209 | |
| HB61 | |
| HB33 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SCR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 209 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 61 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 33 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
April 7, 2011
3:07 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Alan Dick, Vice Chair
Representative Bob Herron
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Beth Kerttula
Representative Charisse Millett
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bob Miller
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 7
Proclaiming September 9, 2011, as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum
Disorders Awareness Day.
- MOVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 209
"An Act requiring a health care insurer to provide coverage for
tobacco cessation treatment."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 61
"An Act relating to a registry for advance health care
directives."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 33
"An Act relating to the procedures and jurisdiction of the
Department of Health and Social Services for the care of
children who are in state custody; relating to court
jurisdiction and findings pertaining to children who are in
state custody; and modifying the licensing requirements for
foster care."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SCR 7
SHORT TITLE: FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDERS DAY
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MEYER
03/22/11 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/22/11 (S) HSS
03/30/11 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/30/11 (S) Moved SCR 7 Out of Committee
03/30/11 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
04/01/11 (S) HSS RPT 5DP
04/01/11 (S) DP: DAVIS, MEYER, ELLIS, EGAN, DYSON
04/04/11 (S) BEFORE THE SENATE ON FINAL PASSAGE
04/04/11 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
04/04/11 (S) VERSION: SCR 7
04/05/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/05/11 (H) HSS
04/07/11 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 209
SHORT TITLE: INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR TOBACCO CESSATION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HERRON
03/25/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/25/11 (H) HSS, L&C
04/07/11 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 61
SHORT TITLE: ADVANCE HEALTH CARE DIRECTIVES REGISTRY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HOLMES, KAWASAKI, OLSON, GARDNER
01/18/11 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/11
01/18/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/11 (H) HSS, JUD, FIN
04/07/11 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 33
SHORT TITLE: FOSTER CARE LICENSING/STATE CUSTODY
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GARA, THOMAS, HERRON, GARDNER
01/18/11 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/11
01/18/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/11 (H) HSS, JUD, FIN
02/25/11 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
02/25/11 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/25/11 (H) HSS, JUD, FIN
04/07/11 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR KEVIN MEYER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SCR 7 as the sponsor of the
bill.
JEANNE GERHARDT CYRUS
Kiana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SCR 7.
KATE BURKHARDT, Executive Director
Advisory Board on Alcoholism & Drug Abuse
Division of Behavioral Health
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SCR 7.
JANE ANN BOER, Intern
Representative Bob Herron
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 209 on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative Bob Herron.
EMILY NENON, Alaska Government Relations Director
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACSCAN)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 209 and HB 61.
REPRESENTATIVE LINDSEY HOLMES
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 61 as a joint prime sponsor
of the bill.
JAMES WALDO, Staff
Representative Lindsey Holmes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 61 on behalf of the joint
prime sponsor, Representative Holmes.
MARIE DARLIN, Coordinator
AARP Capital City Task Force
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 61.
DR. WARD HURLBURT, Chief Medical Officer/Director
Division of Public Health
Central Office
Department of Health and Social Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the discussion of
HB 61.
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SSHB 33 as a joint prime sponsor
of the bill.
AMANDA METIVIER, Statewide Coordinator
Facing Foster Care in Alaska (FFCA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SSHB 33.
JAN RUTHERDALE, Senior Assistant Attorney General
Child Protection Section
Civil Division (Juneau)
Department of Law (DOL)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of SSHB 33.
TRACY SPARTZ-CAMPBELL, Deputy Director
Central Office
Office of Children's Services
Department of Health and Social Services
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of SSHB 33.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:07:50 PM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Health and Social Services
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
Representatives Keller, Kerttula, Dick Herron, and Seaton were
present at the call to order. Representative Millett arrived as
the meeting was in progress.
SCR 7-FETAL ALCOHOL SPECTRUM DISORDERS DAY
3:08:13 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 7, Proclaiming September 9,
2011, as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Awareness Day.
3:08:40 PM
SENATOR KEVIN MEYER, Alaska State Legislature, reported that
families with children with FASD were recognized internationally
on September 9, at 9:09 a.m. He explained that FASD was caused
by pre-natal exposure to alcohol, and its effects included
permanent brain damage, birth defects, learning disabilities,
and behavioral problems. He confirmed that Alaska had the
highest known rate of FASD in the United States, although it was
totally preventable. He heralded the goal of not drinking
alcohol while pregnant.
3:12:04 PM
JEANNE GERHARDT CYRUS shared that she was a parent of multiple
children with prenatal exposure to alcohol. She expressed her
support for SCR 7. She emphasized the importance for partners,
co-workers, and families of pregnant women to support sobriety
during pregnancy, as the sole cause of FASD was alcohol
exposure, which resulted in a lifelong disability. She observed
that although it was the most common cause of retardation, it
did not qualify for developmental disability services or special
education in the schools. She listed many of the problems to
include mental health problems, disruptive school experience,
inappropriate sexual behavior, and alcohol and drug problems.
She declared the best strategies to be prevention and early
intervention.
3:15:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked for the reasons that FASD kids did
not qualify for special education.
MS. CYRUS replied that diagnosis was not available everywhere,
especially in the rural communities, and that often there was
not awareness by the schools or the parents. She pointed out
that FASD had to be recognized, and then it was often classified
as "other health impaired." She recounted that many FASD issues
were behavioral, and were treated as a discipline issue.
3:17:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON expressed his agreement.
3:18:19 PM
CHAIR KELLER acknowledged the Advisory Board on Alcoholism and
Drug Abuse study, "Economic Costs of Alcohol and Other Drugs in
Alaska, 2005 update." [Included in members' packets]
3:18:47 PM
KATE BURKHARDT, Executive Director, Advisory Board on Alcoholism
& Drug Abuse, Division of Behavioral Health, explained that the
Advisory Board was also a founding member of the FASD
Partnership, and that both organizations supported proposed SCR
7. She declared that SCR 7 was not just about prevention, but
also about identification of and improvement for those lives
affected by FASD. She spoke about an annual partnership event
with the Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant & Retailers
Association (CHARR), the alcohol industry, and individual
alcohol retailers for distribution of educational information
and non-alcoholic beverages. She applauded efforts for a
permanent declaration of FASD day.
3:22:04 PM
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony.
3:22:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK moved to report SCR 7 out of committee with
individual recommendations. There being no objection, SCR 7 was
reported from the House Health and Social Services Standing
Committee.
HB 209-INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR TOBACCO CESSATION
3:23:34 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 209, "An Act requiring a health care insurer to
provide coverage for tobacco cessation treatment."
JANE ANN BOER, Intern, Representative Bob Herron, Alaska State
Legislature, paraphrased the sponsor statement for HB 209:
Tobacco dependence is a chronic and lasting condition
that negatively affects the health, productivity, and
overall well being of Alaskans and their loved ones.
Statistics show that tobacco is a leading cause of
death in Alaska. Tobacco addiction kills more
Alaskans each year than suicide, motor vehicle
crashes, chronic liver disease and cirrhosis,
homicide, and HIV/AIDS combined. In 2007, tobacco use
cost Alaskans $314 million in direct medical
expenditures and an additional $177 million in lost
productivity due to tobacco-related deaths.
This bill gives Alaskans the resources and support
they need to end tobacco addiction. It requires
insurance companies to provide smoking cessation
programs to aid those who wish to be free from tobacco
addiction. With the implementation of House Bill 209,
insurance companies would provide coverage for a
minimum of two courses of treatment during each year.
Two courses allow for multiple attempts for those
smokers who continue to work towards ending addiction.
Coverage provides for not less than four counseling
sessions in each course as well as over the counter or
proscribed medication approved by the USFDA.
While coverage includes both counseling and
medication, counseling is not a precondition for
medication so that treatment is flexible to personal
preferences. Data show that programs where
participants may tailor treatment to personal
preferences and needs are the most effective.
This bill provides the assistance many Alaskans need
to end tobacco addiction and live healthy, long,
productive lives. The long term effects of House Bill
209 will be cost savings in medical expenditures,
increased productivity in the work place, lower long-
term insurance costs for insurance providers, and
healthier, happier Alaskans.
3:27:15 PM
MS. BOER opined that a lack of mandates could increase costs for
insurers, as conditions not covered by insurance often go
unchecked, and cost more in the long term. She stated that HB
209 was an inexpensive, preventative measure for the extremely
expensive long term addiction to tobacco.
3:28:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if any other states had these
programs.
MS. BOER replied that, of the five other states with these
programs, Oregon had shown the greatest success, with a decrease
of 26 percent.
3:29:29 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked how much it would cost to quit smoking.
MS. BOER replied that the cost could range from $0.66 to $1.20
per year.
CHAIR KELLER asked specifically about the treatments and those
costs.
3:30:10 PM
MS. BOER explained some of the treatments, which included gum,
patches, inhalers, nasal sprays, and lozenges.
3:31:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DICK asked about the rates of success.
MS. BOER, in response to Representative Dick, said that she
would supply those statistics. She reported that the bill
allowed for two courses, which included four counseling
sessions, to attempt to quit.
3:31:47 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked who would be covered by this bill. He
pointed out that legislation had no jurisdiction over the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), Medicaid, or
Medicare.
3:32:29 PM
MS. BOER reported that about 15 percent of state insured and 34
percent of self insured populations were smokers, but she did
not know if all the individual plans would be required to
comply. She shared that ERISA insurance already included
tobacco cessation treatment. She noted that HB 209 provided
further details to the programs.
3:33:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the bill would include the state
insurance and the retiree insurance policies.
MS. BOER replied that both plans were included.
3:34:03 PM
EMILY NENON, Alaska Government Relations Director, American
Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACSCAN), stated that
ACSCAN supported HB 209, and she directed attention to its
letter of support. [Included in members' packets] She shared
that each additional piece of support for tobacco cessation
increased the chances for success. She pointed out the
difficulty to quit smoking, noting that it took an average of
seven attempts to quit permanently.
3:35:49 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked where in HB 209 coverage was declared by the
State of Alaska insurance plan. He asked to clarify that the
Legislature had the jurisdiction over all health care plans.
3:36:21 PM
MS. BOER, in response, said that she would supply that
information.
3:37:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, referring to page 2, lines 2-4, asked for
the purpose of the provision.
MS. BOER replied that this provision guaranteed that everyone
could receive the treatment, as pre-authorization could result
in some exclusions.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, referring to page 2, lines 9-11, opined
that pre-authorization was for the knowledge of the cost of co-
payments and deductibles. He asked for more specific
information on the necessity for pre-authorization.
3:39:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA, pointing to page 1, lines 9-11, and to
page 2, lines 7-8, asked about the conflicting statements that
coverage must include the cost of counseling sessions, but then
later in the bill it stated that it was not required. She asked
about the program in other states, and if there were any
statistics for the success of each approach.
MS. BOER replied that the programs varied throughout the other
five states, and that in the model legislation used by HB 209,
there was the choice for either treatment.
[HB 209 was held over.]
HB 61-ADVANCE HEALTH CARE DIRECTIVES REGISTRY
3:40:19 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 61, "An Act relating to a registry for advance
health care directives."
3:41:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LINDSEY HOLMES, Alaska State Legislature,
explained that HB 61 dealt with advance health care directives,
or living wills, which detailed end of life and health care
wishes, as well as designating a decision maker if the
individual was not able. She offered an example for the
difficulties encountered when a living will was not accessible.
She explained that HB 61 created a secure, voluntary, 24 hour,
on line registry for living wills, housed in the Department of
Health and Social Services (DHSS), which was accessible by other
hospitals and health care facilities. She pointed out that out
of state access would also be available during business hours.
3:44:02 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked how many states had implemented this.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES replied that Legislative Research had
researched a company to set this up more efficiently and less
costly than DHSS.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES, in response to Chair Keller, said that
the initial set up cost would be $194,800; in subsequent years,
the cost would be $82,400 for a part time employee and the cost
of the on line registry.
3:45:33 PM
JAMES WALDO, Staff, Representative Lindsey Holmes, Alaska State
Legislature, shared that Legislative Research did prepare a
report on the advanced health care directives and registries of
various states. He reported that seven states already
participated or had central state registries.
3:46:53 PM
MR. WALDO, directing attention to Section 1 of HB 61, said that
it protected health care facilities against liability for
accessing or not accessing the registry. He moved on to Section
2, which dictated into statute how the registry would work. He
reported that each subsection explained a piece of the bill: (a)
created the authorization for the registry within DHSS; (b)
established that it was voluntary; (c) reiterated the
confidentiality to the hospitals in the state; (d) discussed its
availability on line within the state; (e) clarified the legal
parameters; (f) addressed the removal of a directive from the
registry; whereas (h) stated that a fee could be charged for
filing a directive, but not for removing it; (g) clarified that
filing the directive or not filing it, did not affect the
validity of a directive; (i) authorized DHSS to write
regulations to protect the cyber-security of the registry; (j)
identified who could access a directive: (k) exempted DHSS from
liability; and (l) contained definitions for terms used within
the bill.
3:52:04 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked for clarification to page 2, lines 3-4.
MR. WALDO replied that this referred to one individual, not two.
He pointed to lines 12-13, which defined someone other than the
individual.
3:54:03 PM
CHAIR KELLER, referring to page 2, lines 14 and 15, asked if
this should be more specific.
3:55:24 PM
MR. WALDO replied that it required that the request must come
from the facility where the individual was a patient, and most
likely, the patient's doctor would request the directive.
3:56:04 PM
CHAIR KELLER, referring to subsection (c) on page 2, lines 5-8,
asked for clarity to the word "use."
3:57:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, directing attention to page 3, lines 7-8,
asked to clarify that the fee would not be any greater than its
cost to the department.
3:58:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES replied that the department was not
required to charge a fee but that it was allowed. The fee could
not exceed the actual administrative cost, as the intent was to
keep the cost low.
3:58:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked about the costs incurred by other
states.
3:59:05 PM
MR. WALDO replied that three of the seven states participated in
a national data base, which was significantly more expensive,
and that the Arizona centralized registry was more comprehensive
than the one proposed in HB 61.
4:00:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, noting that the information form would be
scanned into the registry, asked to verify that DHSS was not
responsible for checking the validity of the information.
MR. WALDO agreed.
4:01:36 PM
MARIE DARLIN, Coordinator, AARP Capital City Task Force,
testified in support of HB 61. She stated that this was the
next necessary step for the access to advance directives. She
pointed out that some hospitals had joined a registry group, as
a way for other hospitals to access your records. She opined
that HB 61 had covered all the points for concern.
4:04:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked to clarify that Bartlett Hospital
could release the advance directive to any hospital in the
nation.
MS. DARLIN offered her belief that Bartlett Hospital would place
your advance directive on this national registry.
4:06:00 PM
CHAIR KELLER asked how many national registers there were, and
if AARP sponsored a registry.
4:06:53 PM
MS. DARLIN, in response to Representative Herron, said that AARP
had worked hard to get the advanced directives into statute.
4:07:34 PM
MS. NENON testified in support of HB 61. She shared a personal
story of her father and his problems of advance directives
without registries.
4:10:58 PM
DR. WARD HURLBURT, Chief Medical Officer/Director, Division of
Public Health, Central Office, Department of Health and Social
Services, said that the administration did not have a position
on the bill. He opined, as a Public Health clinician, that
everyone should have a living will.
4:11:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked how many hospitals inquired whether
a patient had a living will on file.
DR. HURLBURT replied that he did not know that specific for
Alaska. He offered his belief that every hospital should ask
that question, but that even with this legislation the question
might not be asked. He pointed to this as a failing of the
health care system.
4:13:24 PM
CHAIR KELLER remarked that all the necessary forms were
available in the statute.
DR. HURLBURT reminded the committee that the ethical default was
to keep people alive, although the result of that could
sometimes be tragic.
4:14:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked the bill sponsor to survey for the
default position of the individual hospitals regarding living
wills.
4:15:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT reflected that end of life issues were
very difficult and emotional decisions. She opined that the
registry offered support for these decisions.
[HB 61 was held over.]
HB 33-FOSTER CARE LICENSING/STATE CUSTODY
4:16:34 PM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business would be
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 33, "An Act relating to
the procedures and jurisdiction of the Department of Health and
Social Services for the care of children who are in state
custody; relating to court jurisdiction and findings pertaining
to children who are in state custody; and modifying the
licensing requirements for foster care."
4:17:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, Alaska State Legislature, explained
that SSHB 33 did not have a fiscal note, and that the Department
of Health and Social Services (DHSS) had worked closely with the
joint prime sponsors on the language of the bill. Directing
attention to the proposed amendment [Included in members'
packets], he confirmed its request by the Department of Law
(DOL) as there had been technical changes to prior foster care
legislation. He established that SSHB 33 created the
presumption that siblings live together, with a requirement for
case worker explanation and supervisorial agreement to allow
otherwise. Reflecting on the rural code requirements for foster
care housing, he shared that those requirements not in federal
law could be waived if it was in the best interest of the child
and the home was safe. He endorsed a goal of foster care for
permanency, to get children into a permanent home. He opined
that the DHSS would "give up on permanency sometimes." He
confirmed that SBHB33 stated: "unless there's a compelling
reason, you have to keep looking for a permanent for a child.
You can't just give up and say we'll put you in bounce able
foster care." He defined APPLA to be "another planned permanent
living arrangement," and explained it to be the act of giving up
on finding permanent placement for a child. He stressed that
this was not acceptable without a compelling reason. He
analyzed the last provision of the bill, requiring that at least
30 days notice be given to the youth and the guardian ad litem
for transfer out of foster care, unless agreement by all the
parties. He explained the various post foster care benefits
which included assistance for college tuition, work force
training, and rent.
4:22:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA shared that the Director of the Office of
Children's Services (OCS) had recently written in a newsletter
that DHSS used APPLA too much.
CHAIR KELLER asked if the APPLA definition was included in SSHB
33.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied that the definition was included in
the proposed amendment on page 4, line 24.
4:24:16 PM
CHAIR KELLER reflected that it was "an alternative to permanent
placement with an adult family member, and an alternative to
reunification, adoption, and legal guardianship." He asked if a
living arrangement could be more than "a mom and a dad,
siblings..."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied that APPLA simply meant keeping
someone in foster care with no guarantee of not being moved to
another home. He stated that the goal was for parent or
guardian permanence.
4:25:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked to clarify that children had
foster care terminated with no notice.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA observed that although DHSS tried to avoid
it, cases existed of children receiving notice one day prior to
the end of foster care. He endorsed a statute which required
DHSS and OCS to do better.
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA offered her belief that this change was
necessary.
4:26:24 PM
AMANDA METIVIER, Statewide Coordinator, Facing Foster Care in
Alaska (FFCA), responding to questions regarding APPLA, stated
that this was supportive of long term foster care. She pointed
out that SSHB 33 would restrict the use of APPLA, so that youth
would not "age out" and the search for permanency would never
stop. She stressed the never ending need for family. She
highlighted the difficulties that arose with a release from
custody without notice. She spoke about the need to keep
siblings together.
4:30:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA, referring to the termination of foster
care, asked if there was a requirement to give notice, or if OCS
had failed to give notice.
MS. METIVIER replied that OCS was supposed to give notice to all
parties, but she was unsure of the lead time required. She
agreed that it could be difficult to contact youth, as they were
mobile.
4:32:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 27-
LS0203\E.1, Mischel, 4/6/11, which read:
Page 3, line 6, following "blood":
Insert ", marriage, or adoption"
Page 3, lines 16 - 17:
Delete "[AN] additional one-year periods [PERIOD]
of supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued"
Insert "an additional one-year period of custody
or supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age and
additional one-year periods of custody that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued
custody or"
Page 3, line 20:
Delete "minor"
Insert "child [MINOR]"
Page 4, lines 3 - 5:
Delete "[AN] additional one-year periods [PERIOD]
of supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued"
Insert "an additional one-year period of custody
or supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age and
additional one-year periods of custody that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued
custody or"
Page 4, line 8, following "placed":
Insert "in the custody or"
Page 4, lines 10 - 12:
Delete "[AN] additional one-year periods [PERIOD]
of supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued"
Insert "an additional one-year period of custody
or supervision past [AGE] 19 years of age and
additional one-year periods of custody that do not
extend beyond the person's 21st birthday if continued
custody or"
Page 4, line 31, following "recommend":
Insert "to the court"
Page 5, following line 1:
Insert "(1) the child is 16 years of age or
older;"
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
Page 5, line 3, following "child;":
Insert "and"
Page 5, line 8:
Delete "; and"
Insert "."
Page 5, lines 9 - 10:
Delete all material.
Page 5, lines 11 - 12:
Delete "who is under 19 years of age"
Page 5, line 12, following "department":
Insert ", before the date custody is ordered to
end,"
Page 5, line 13, following "child":
Insert ", if the child is over 16 years of age
and available,"
Page 5, line 14:
Delete "petition for release is filed"
Insert "motion for release is filed, unless the
parties agree to a shorter notice period"
Page 5, line 15:
Delete "petition with the court for termination"
Insert "motion with the court for release"
Page 5, line 16:
Delete "and release"
Page 5, following line 19:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(r) When custody of a child who has been
committed to the custody of the department is due to
expire, the department shall file a notice of release
with the court 30 days before the date of release
unless the parties agree to a shorter notice period
and distribute the notice to the parties, including
the child if the child is 16 years of age or older and
available."
Reletter the following subsections accordingly.
Page 5, lines 20 - 21:
Delete "all reasonable efforts to place siblings
who are in the custody of the department in the same
placement"
Insert "reasonable efforts to place siblings in
the same placement if the siblings are residing in the
same home when taken into the custody of the
department"
Page 5, line 22:
Delete "state or regional director of"
Insert "case supervisor for"
Page 5, lines 23 - 24:
Delete "provide a written explanation in the file
of"
Insert "document in the file"
Page 5, line 26, following "blood":
Insert ", adoption,"
Page 5, line 30:
Delete "is more than 15 years of age and"
Page 6, line 4:
Delete ";"
Insert "."
Page 6, lines 5 - 6:
Delete all material.
Page 6, following line 6:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(u) In this section, "another planned permanent
living arrangement" means a permanent living
arrangement for a child who is committed to the
custody of the department under AS 47.10.080(c)(1)
that is an alternative to permanent placement with an
adult family member, and to reunification, adoption,
and legal guardianship."
Page 6, lines 8 - 9:
Delete "ensure that"
Insert "streamline"
Page 6, lines 10 - 11:
Delete "is not unduly complex and is as short and
straightforward as necessary to protect a child's best
interests"
Insert "to the extent consistent with federal
law"
Page 6, lines 15 - 17:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
There being no objection, it was so ordered.
4:34:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA, asking about the process for
termination of foster care, requested assurance that it did not
happen on a moment's notice.
JAN RUTHERDALE, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Child
Protection Section, Civil Division (Juneau), explained that a
child can leave the system at 18 years of age, if the term of
custody had ended or a motion to be let out early was filed.
She pointed out that the bill addressed the end of custody
provision, and required that notice be given. She offered her
belief that more of the surprises occurred when the term of
custody expired, as only the court could end custody early. She
declared that DHSS was required by statute to notify the foster
parents, but that SSHB 33 also required notification to an older
child, if they were available. She confirmed that, in Juneau,
the local practice was for notification of the end of the term
for custody to be sent 30 days in advance to both the parties
and the courts. She declared that the bill would make this a
state-wide practice.
4:38:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked the reasons for different lengths of
custody.
MS. RUTHERDALE explained that the term of custody could only be
for two years, and then up to one year for each extension. She
pointed out that, as a term of custody could often begin mid-
year of a child's chronological age, the custody could then last
beyond the age of 18.
4:39:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the normal procedure was based on
calendar year extensions and not on age of the child.
MS. RUTHERDALE replied that it could vary, though always for the
best interest of the child.
4:40:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HERRON asked if the "best practice" was defined
as 30 days.
MS. RUTHERDALE replied that the actual notice was more than 30
days to allow time for motion and possible opposition, so that
it was actually closer to 60 days.
4:41:09 PM
TRACY SPARTZ-CAMPBELL, Deputy Director, Central Office, Office
of Children's Services, Department of Health and Social
Services, in response to Chair Keller, said that about 1200
children were in foster care in Alaska. She opined that about
100 of them were over the age of 18.
CHAIR KELLER, reflecting on children over 18 years but under 21
years of age, pondered the amount of loving adult supervision.
4:42:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KERTTULA asked for the percentage of foster care
kids in foster homes.
MS. SPARTZ-CAMPBELL replied that most of them, if in custody,
would be in some type of placement. In response to
Representative Kerttula, she confirmed that there were hundreds
and hundreds of foster homes.
[SSHB 33 was held over.]
4:42:48 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 4:42 p.m.