Legislature(2021 - 2022)DAVIS 106
05/06/2021 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Children's Justice Act Task Force | |
| HB105 | |
| HB13 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
May 6, 2021
3:04 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Liz Snyder, Co-Chair
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky, Co-Chair
Representative Ivy Spohnholz
Representative Zack Fields
Representative Ken McCarty
Representative Mike Prax
Representative Christopher Kurka
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: CHILDREN'S JUSTICE ACT TASK FORCE
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 105
"An Act relating to the duties of the commissioner of
corrections; relating to the detention of minors; relating to
minors subject to adult courts; relating to the placement of
minors in adult correctional facilities; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 105(HSS) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to shared child custody; relating to relocation
of a child out of state; and relating to a presumption of the
best interests of the child in child custody and visitation
determinations."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 105
SHORT TITLE: DETENTION OF MINORS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/19/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/21 (H) JUD, HSS
03/05/21 (H) JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/05/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/05/21 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/08/21 (H) JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/08/21 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/10/21 (H) JUD AT 1:30 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/10/21 (H) Moved CSHB 105(JUD) Out of Committee
03/10/21 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/12/21 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) 4DP 3NR
03/12/21 (H) DP: DRUMMOND, SNYDER, KREISS-TOMKINS,
CLAMAN
03/12/21 (H) NR: EASTMAN, VANCE, KURKA
04/15/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/15/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/15/21 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
04/27/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/27/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/27/21 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
04/29/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/29/21 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/04/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
05/04/21 (H) Heard & Held
05/04/21 (H) MINUTE(HSS)
05/06/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
BILL: HB 13
SHORT TITLE: SHARED CHILD CUSTODY: BEST INTEREST
SPONSOR(s): RAUSCHER
02/18/21 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/21
02/18/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/21 (H) HSS, STA
02/19/21 (H) JUD REPLACES STA REFERRAL
02/19/21 (H) BILL REPRINTED
05/06/21 (H) HSS AT 3:00 PM DAVIS 106
WITNESS REGISTER
CATHY BALDWIN-JOHNSON, MD
Board Member, Alaska Children's Justice Act Task Force
Medical Director, The Children's Place
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a presentation titled, "Alaska
Children's Justice Act Task Force, State of Alaska's Children:
2021 Update".
JARED PARRISH, PhD
Board Member, Alaska Children's Act Task Force
Senior Epidemiologist, MCH-Epi
Division of Public Health (DPH)
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a presentation titled, "Alaska
Children's Justice Act Task Force, State of Alaska's Children:
2021 Update".
HEIDI REDDICK
Board Member, Alaska Children's Justice Act Task Force
Deputy Director of Operations
Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Co-provided a presentation titled, "Alaska
Children's Justice Act Task Force, State of Alaska's Children:
2021 Update."
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel
Alaska Court System
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 105, explained the
reasons for the two proposed amendments.
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 13.
DAVID VESPER, Legislative Director
The Fathers' Rights Movement
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 13, provided
invited testimony in support of the bill.
DIXIE BANNER, State Director
Alaska Fathers' Rights Movement
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 13, provided
invited testimony in support of the bill.
ALLEN BAILEY, Esq.
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 13.
RITA ALLEE, Esq.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 13.
MARIANNA MALLORY
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 13.
ALESHA P.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 13.
TARYN BIRD, Esq.
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 13.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:04:42 PM
CO-CHAIR TIFFANY ZULKOSKY called the House Health and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:04 p.m.
Representatives McCarty, Fields, Snyder, and Zulkosky were
present at the call to order. Representatives Spohnholz, Prax,
and Kurka arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION: Children's Justice Act Task Force
PRESENTATION: Children's Justice Act Task Force
3:05:27 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the first order of business
would be a presentation from the Children's Justice Act Task
Force.
3:06:21 PM
CATHY BALDWIN-JOHNSON, MD, Board Member, Alaska Children's
Justice Act Task Force, Medical Director, The Children's Place,
co-provided a presentation titled, "Alaska Children's Justice
Act Task Force, State of Alaska's Children: 2021 Update". She
displayed the second slide, "Introduction to the Alaska CJATF,"
and explained that the task force is federally mandated and
funded. She related that the task force's mission is to
identify areas where improvement is needed in the statewide
response to child maltreatment, make recommendations, and take
action to improve the system. Past work of this statewide
multidisciplinary task force has included legislation to improve
protection and justice for children. The task force focuses on
education about child abuse in Alaska, mandatory reporting, and
best practices for the multidisciplinary response to child
abuse.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON proceeded to the third slide, "Key Points",
and said today's presentation would include an update on the
newest research on child abuse and neglect in Alaska, review of
the pandemic impact on [the state] system's response to child
maltreatment, ideas to help families with children who have
problematic sexual behaviors, and recommendations to improve
future child safety and well-being.
3:08:53 PM
JARED PARRISH, PhD, Board Member, Alaska Children's Act Task
Force, Senior Epidemiologist, MCH-Epi, Division of Public Health
(DPH), Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), co-
provided a presentation titled, "Alaska Children's Justice Act
Task Force, State of Alaska's Children: 2021 Update". He
addressed the fourth slide, "Building a stronger Alaska". He
pointed out that when thinking about child abuse, maltreatment,
and neglect, the thinking should be about the removal of the
child's internal strength. He compared this removal of inner
strength to a tree having its inner trunk invisibly destroyed by
bugs such that when winds (stressors in the case of the child)
come along the tree (child) ends up toppling over a little bit
easier. He said a variety of resources and strengths need to be
done collectively to intervene and have a stronger effect for
helping the child.
3:10:18 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON discussed the fifth slide, "Prevent further
child abuse & neglect". She said the task force recommends that
legislators support programs that strengthen families because
strong, stable, nurturing families create strong, healthier,
safer children going forward. She added that the task force
encourages legislators to continue to support local child
advocacy centers (CACs), and that the task force recommends
making some essential changes to the current multidisciplinary
team (MDT) statute to allow CACs to provide services to kids and
families when state agencies opt out.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON continued to the sixth slide, "Budget
considerations". She cited a recently published study,
["Economic Costs of Child Abuse and Neglect in Alaska in 2019"].
This study, she reported, determined that costs for non-fatal
child abuse cases in Alaska include an estimated $710 million in
"human capital" costs for health, child welfare, criminal
justice system, special education, and productivity loss. That
cost reached $2.3 billion, she continued, when premature
mortality and quality of life were looked at.
3:12:20 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON showed the seventh slide, "Child Abuse &
Neglect in Alaska, How are the children?" She proceeded to the
eighth slide, "Adverse Childhood Experiences", and explained
that a large, collaborative study was done by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention and Kaiser Permanente, a health
maintenance organization in San Diego. She specified that over
17,000 adults were interviewed from a group that would be
considered relatively low risk in that they were middle-aged,
mostly white, and most had had some college education. They
were asked questions about abuse, neglect, and five categories
of household dysfunction that had happened to them before age
18. One point was given for each of those categories to provide
an adverse childhood experience (ACE) score.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON moved to the nineth slide, "Findings: ACEs
Are Common". She related that the researchers were surprised to
find that ACEs were common in this relatively low-risk
population. Over 25 percent of these adults reported a history
of physical abuse, 21 percent reported a history of sexual
abuse, over 25 percent had [household] substance abuse present,
[19 percent] reported [household] mental illness, and [13
percent] saw their mother beaten up.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON proceeded to the tenth slide, "ACES: It's
Not Just One Bad Thing". She recounted that the researchers
found it wasn't just one bad thing that had happened to these
adults when they were children. The researchers found that if
any one ACE category was present, there was an 87 percent chance
that at least one other category was experienced by these adults
as children, and a 50 percent chance that three or more of the
categories had been experienced.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON displayed the eleventh slide, "ACEs have
consequences:". She related that when looking at adult health
and well-being, the researchers found that the more ACEs a
person had experienced the more likely the person was to be in
poor physical or mental health.
3:14:32 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON spoke to the twelfth slide, "ACEs in Alaska:
Snapshot". She said the data for ACEs in Alaska is like the
findings elsewhere - many adults in Alaska have experienced
various kinds of adversities as children and those impacts are
seen in the state. Adults with higher ACE scores are much more
likely to be unemployed, unable to work, living below the
poverty line, and to report that they have poor mental and
physical health.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON addressed the table on the thirteenth slide
depicting household dysfunction and abuse in Alaska. She
related that an adult with a history of having been physically
abused had an almost 36 percent chance of also having been
sexually abused, and an over 42 percent chance that one of their
parents or caregivers was mentally ill. So, for Alaska, like
elsewhere, it's never just one bad thing, she pointed out.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON moved to the fourteenth slide, "Life course
perspective", and noted the graph shows there is an opportunity
to change the trajectory of children's lives. She stated it is
known that the higher the number of bad things thrown at
children, the more likely they are to be on a poor life health
trajectory. The San Diego study found that people with an ACE
score of six or greater lived on average 20 years less.
3:16:26 PM
DR. PARRISH discussed the fifteenth slide, "ALCANLink A mixed
design approach". He said the Alaska Longitudinal Child Abuse
and Neglect (ALCAN) linkage project is a unique data resource
where a longitudinal birth cohort is followed over time. It is
built upon the back of the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring
System Survey (PRAMSS), which is conducted in nearly all 50
states, he explained. It samples approximately one out of every
six live births in Alaska each year. It is systematically
sampled and weighted to the birth population so population-based
inferences can be made. It is integrated with a three-year
follow-up survey called Alaska CUBS, as well as linked with
administrative data from child welfare and the permanent fund
dividend so the root sensor can be administered when an
individual leaves the state. With this longitudinal birth
cohort, he further explained, how the family was existing before
the child's birth can be looked at and then what they experience
over time can be followed.
DR. PARRISH proceeded to the graph shown on the sixteenth slide,
"Among children born during 2009-2011 in Alaska (n=33,417)
th
Before their 11 birthday:". Immediately detected while
following this cohort over time, he related, is just how many
kids over their life course have contact with the child welfare
system. He said the graph depicts that for kids born in Alaska
between 2009 and 2011, almost 40 percent experience at least one
th
report to child protective services before their 11 birthday,
which is one out of every 2.5 births. Nearly 33 percent of
those first reports are screened in, he continued, about 13
percent experience a substantiated report, and almost 8 percent
will experience a removal before their 11th birthday for any
amount of time.
3:18:41 PM
DR. PARRISH moved to the seventeenth slide, "Maternal
experiences likely provide an 'early warning'". He stated that
this data set is powerful because researchers can start
understanding what the factors are that predict contact with or
engagement with the child welfare system. It was found that
maternal experiences likely provide an early warning signal for
the stress that is going on in the home, he related; if
addressing those things can be started, an impact might be had.
[An ALCANLink study] published in 2008 showed that children were
76 percent more likely to be reported to child protective
services if they were born to a mother who experienced at least
one stressful life event during the 12 months before childbirth.
He noted that the eight stressful life events depicted in orange
on the right side of the slide are adverse childhood experience
components that are often referred to as household dysfunction.
A decision was made, he continued, that instead of looking at
ACEs scores as something that is measured from birth until age
17, to look at the household before the kid is born and see what
that relationship is.
DR. PARRISH continued to the eighteenth slide and stated that
the risk of contact with child welfare systematically increases
with the increased number of pre-birth household challenges
reported by the mother. The more experiences the mother says
she had during that 12-month window, he related, the more likely
it is that that child will have contact with child welfare. He
said this is not surprising because the more stresses that
existed before the child's birth, there is a high probability of
that stress continuing. It was decided to not only look at
contact with child welfare, he continued, but to also look at
the child's ACEs score at age three.
DR. PARRISH proceeded to the nineteenth slide and said it was
found that for each additional pre-birth household challenge
reported by the mother, there was a systematic relative increase
in the average childhood ACE score that was observed in the
child at age three. So, the household dysfunctions that are
present in the pre-birth window continue into the child window.
He explained that this provided the idea for moving away a bit
from thinking about individuals in their own context to an
intergenerational context that things transition throughout
generations.
3:21:24 PM
DR. PARRISH turned to the two graphs on the twentieth slide,
"Two main groups identified in the pre-birth period". He said
three things were measured - household challenges before birth,
household challenges during early childhood, and child abuse and
neglect as reported to child welfare. An analysis of those
measurements, he continued, found that two primary groups
emerged in that pre-birth [period] a low-risk group with zero
or one reported stressor and a high-risk group with two or more
reported stressors. He pointed out that among the low-risk
group are some common stressors that are benign when thought
about in context a move or a death and then it substantially
drops off. Among the high-risk group, a move and a death are
also seen, but then things are seen related to economics, drugs,
depression, homelessness, and jail. He said a look was then
taken at the trajectories of children born into a low-risk group
and children born into a high-risk group.
DR. PARRISH spoke to the twenty-first slide, "Changes in number
of household challenges is associated with risk of being
reported to OCS". He said a look was taken at two different
trajectories for families in the pre-birth low-risk and high-
risk categories. For families in the pre-birth low-risk
category, if in early childhood the mother then reported more
stressors it transitioned her into a higher risk category and
the risk of a report to OCS increased by 140 percent; if the
mother stayed low risk the risk didn't change and remained low.
For families in the pre-birth high-risk category, if the mother
reported an increased number of stressors during early childhood
the risk didn't change, it remained a high-risk household and
the risk for child welfare stayed the same; however, if the
number of household stressors decreased, the risk of report to
OCS decreased by 43 percent. So, he continued, the evidence
from longitudinal data is that if the household number of
stressors decreases it can be expected, with statistical
reliance, that a fewer number of children will be reported to
child welfare.
3:24:25 PM
DR. PARRISH addressed the twenty-second slide, "Pre-Birth
Maternal Stressors and Reading Scores". He pointed out that in
looking at the links with education records it was found that
household stressors have effects not only on violence
potentially, but also early school readiness and performance.
Relative to children born to mothers reporting zero to one
household stressors, he continued, the children born to mothers
reporting two or three stressors are 28 percent more likely to
score below or far below on their [third grade] reading score,
and children born to mothers reporting four or more stressors
are 43 percent more likely to score below or far below on their
reading score.
DR. PARRISH proceeded to the twenty-third slide, "Children with
a report to Child Welfare are:". He conveyed that these
children are 16 percent more likely to score lower on the Alaska
Developmental Profile, which is administered at kindergarten as
a measure of school readiness. Further, he said, these children
are 42 percent more likely to score below or far below on their
third grade reading score and 120 percent more likely to have
chronic absenteeism. He said he knows that much effort is being
put into improving school performance, readiness, and addressing
child maltreatment, so everyone is talking about similar things
regarding strengthening the family very early on and providing
continued supports in a variety of ways.
3:26:07 PM
DR. PARRISH showed the twenty-fourth slide, "A connected and
comprehensive approach required to support child wellbeing!" He
concluded his portion of the presentation by advising that it is
important to remember that these factors don't occur in a
vacuum, they cluster together. For example, for the offspring
of mothers experiencing some form of mental illness in the 12-
month window before birth, 62 percent have impulse or emotional
control problems in kindergarten, 77 percent have poor third
grade reading scores, and 44 percent have a report to OCS before
age 9. These children, he continued, have an ACE score that is
two times as high as their counterparts whose parents don't have
mental illness. Also, these children have on average over three
co-existing stressors and those co-existing stressors can
include a mother being treated violently, an incarcerated
caregiver, substance use, or financial issues. The family is
like a small business, he further advised. When thinking about
the types of interventions, what is being talked about are
multi-faceted and well-coordinated efforts that are aware of
what the others are doing and how all these efforts are trying
to support the family that makes up the core of all these
enterprises.
3:27:31 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON moved to the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth
slides, "From Alaska Maternal Child Death Review", and provided
additional data. She explained that the [2016-2019] Alaska
Maternal Child Death Review (MCDR) is a summary of [502] deaths
of Alaska children up to the age of 17. Of those deaths, she
reported, 19 percent were felt to be maltreatment related,
meaning that maltreatment (either abuse and/or neglect) either
caused or was a contributing factor to that child's death. She
further reported that abuse or neglect contributed to 40 percent
of child deaths from firearms, 31 percent of child deaths from
suicide, 29 percent of sudden unexpected infant deaths, 17
percent of child deaths from motor vehicle crashes, and 8
percent of child deaths from medical causes. She said the
review also found that [55] percent of the children who died had
a parent or caregiver who had maltreated either this child or
another child in the past, and that in 80 percent of the child
deaths at least one of the child's caregivers had a history of
substance misuse. She noted that for comparison, of child
deaths not related to maltreatment, 47 percent had a caregiver
with substance abuse.
3:29:02 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON displayed the graph on the twenty-seventh
slide, "How do we create the best future for our children's
lives?" She showed the twenty-eighth slide, "Recommendations",
and then moved to the twenty-ninth slide, "Support programs that
strengthen families". She explained that because the family is
like a small business, programs are needed that are supportive
and help to strengthen families. She said examples include
"Help me grow", a free program under the umbrella of All Alaska
Pediatric Partnership that provides resources and supports to
promote healthy child development; the "Alaska Resilience
Initiative", which is under the umbrella of Alaska Children's
Trust, a support network of various organizations working to
reduce ACEs and build resilience in Alaska's children; and two
"Nurse-Family Partnership Programs", one through Providence and
one through Southcentral Foundation Nutaaqsiivik, which include
home visitation programs that provide education and support to
pregnant women and their children for the children's first three
years of life.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON drew attention to the thirtieth slide,
"'Strengthening Families' program", and recommended legislative
support for this program. This program, she explained, is
through the Child Welfare Academy and its goal is to support
child and family well-being. The program is research based and
helps families to reduce their stress and risk factors to reduce
that "ACE dose" to their kids and promote healthy development of
their kids. She related that the Child Welfare Academy is
willing to provide legislators and staff with training via a
full or abbreviated educational course, as well as provide a
presentation at [the legislature's weekly] Lunch and Learn.
3:31:40 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON continued to the thirty-first slide,
"Support programs that strengthen communities". She explained
that these programs are collective impact initiatives in
communities. Two examples, she said, are Raising Our Children
with Kindness (ROCK) Mat-Su and Southern Kenai Peninsula
Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships (MAPP).
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON turned to the thirty-second slide, "Pandemic
impact on our ability to protect children". She related a
descriptive statement from an OCS staff person "Everything
that was hard before is harder now."
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON spoke to the thirty-third slide, "What is
known". She said prior research has shown that emergencies and
disasters create increased stress on families. For example, she
continued, during the Great Recession of 2007-2009, an increase
in high frequency spanking was reported. After Hurricane Floyd
[in 1999] it was found that intentional and unintentional child
traumatic brain injury increased up until six months after the
disaster. After the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake in California,
it was found that the physical abuse of children was higher and
persisted for months afterward. Other studies show that child
maltreatment tends to increase following disasters, such as
physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect.
3:33:35 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON proceeded to the thirty-fourth slide, "In
Alaska". She reported that the pandemic has increased stress
for many Alaskan children and families. She said this stress
was due to unemployment, loss of employment related benefits,
food insufficiency, housing instability, education, childcare,
and illness and death of family members due to COVID-19 or other
causes.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON discussed the thirty-fifth slide, "Survey of
7179 Alaskan adults, (11-12/2020)", which was done through the
Maternal Child Health Epidemiology unit of DPS. She specified
that almost two-thirds of these adults said their overall
emotional health had gotten worse, over one-third were concerned
about the stability of their living situation (and low-income
adults were much more worried about their financial stability),
50 percent were more worried or stressed about paying their
bills, almost two-thirds were more worried or stressed about
obtaining medical care and medications, and almost three-
quarters of these adults had skipped their preventive care due
to COVID-19.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON showed the thirty-sixth slide, "COVID impact
on families, cont.", and further specified that these adults
said the pandemic was also affecting their families. She
conveyed that 88 percent of these adults said they were worried
about the impact of the pandemic on their child's mental health,
83 percent said their children were stressed by changes in their
family routine, 68 percent said their children were more anxious
than usual, 67 percent said their kids were more irritable and
easily angered, and 80 percent were worried about the impact of
the pandemic on their child's education long term.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON spoke to the thirty-seventh slide, "Mental
health care". She pointed out that there have been impacts on
the ability to provide mental health care for people who need
it. While there has been increased stress on kids and families
there has been reduced access for help, she continued. Despite
the innovations in technology such as Zoom and Teams, for many
children this virtual contact is not the same as one-on-one
contact.
3:35:55 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON moved to the thirty-eighth slide, "Child
abuse & neglect". She noted that there has been a drastic
increase in serious child abuse and neglect cases that required
hospitalization [37 cases in 2018, 26 in 2019, and 71 in 2020].
She said serious cases from around the state are transferred to
Providence Alaska Medical Center (PAMC) and Alaska Native
Medical Center (ANMC) in Anchorage, and that Alaska CARES, a
child advocacy center, responds to those cases and provides in-
patient consults.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON addressed the thirty-nineth slide, "Child
Protection". She related that in terms of the Alaska system's
ability to respond with child protection, it is known that
children have had fewer contacts with mandated reporters because
they haven't been in school and Alaska's education system is a
big source of reports to child welfare. Also, children are not
coming in for regular well-child visits and the health care
system is another source of those reports. From talking with
OCS, she continued, it is known that the lower priority cases,
especially at the beginning of the pandemic, weren't being
evaluated because of COVID-19; as well, there were delays in
seeing children due to COVID-19.
3:37:23 PM
DR. PARRISH reviewed the fortieth slide, "COVID-19: Reported
victims to OCS". He said the graph on this slide depicts his
emerging work to get an estimate of how much unreported
maltreatment likely has occurred since the pandemic began 13
months ago. He qualified that the data is preliminary because
this work is still emerging. He specified that the red line on
the graph denotes the monthly number of unique victimized
individual children reported to child welfare and noted that in
March 2020 the number dropped precipitously and "tanked out" in
April. He explained that he built a simple model that allowed
for some month-to-month variation in the model because OCS has
detected a pattern where it looks like a heartbeat that goes up
and down, with the down-spikes generally associated with the
summer months and the up-spikes associated with the fall, and
then a little up-spike after Christmas break. He further
explained that the black dotted line is assuming that the
pandemic did not exist and the [monthly] variability carried on,
so this line estimates what would have been expected to be
observed for continued month-to-month victimization. He said
the pink shading between the solid red line and dotted black
line represents how many cases likely went unreported, with the
model finding that 9,680 children likely went unreported for
this 13-month span. To address the concern that there will be a
surge given all the stressors, he shared that he is currently
working on quantifying the variability around that and
developing some surge projection models to give some estimates
of what Alaska may be looking at. He further noted that he will
be looking at regional comparisons on those regions that
experienced lockdowns and mandates which changed exposure to
mandated reporters to also give an idea of the surge that might
be expected.
3:39:45 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON outlined the forty-first slide, "Child
protection". She noted that when it came to child protection
response OCS staff had many challenges. She pointed out that
initially OCS staff lacked personal protection equipment (PPE)
and arranging visitation for children in care was challenging.
Vising with a parent via Zoom is not the same as in-person, she
added. There were many delays in child protection hearings and
trials, she reported, plus there was a 25 percent increase, a
record high, in turnover of OCS staff.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON proceeded to the forty-second slide, "Law
enforcement". She specified that it became very difficult,
especially in rural areas, to get children in and evaluated at
their regional child advocacy center because of restrictions on
travel in and out of communities, plus there were restrictions
on bringing children in if a child or family member was ill or
had recently traveled.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON reviewed the forty-third slide, "Other
downstream effects". She pointed out that not just families are
stressed by the pandemic but also the service providers, and
some of this may be unknown for months or years. Additionally,
she said, this pandemic is additive to the historical trauma in
Alaska which includes prior devasting disease epidemics.
3:41:45 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON brought attention to the forty-fourth slide,
"Recommendations". She advised that the Children's Justice Act
Task Force is recommending support for those programs that help
to strengthen families and communities. She further advised
that kids haven't been having contact with their mandated
reporters who would normally be there, so the task force is
recommending some amendments [to AS 47.17] to help [expand the
list] of mandated reporters to include [more professionals and
paraprofessionals] who have contact with children. She stated
that the [current] list of mandated reporters wasn't meant to be
an exclusive list, but some people think that because their role
isn't specifically on the list it means they are not mandated
reporters. For example, she said it would help protect kids if
people who work at public and private animal shelters were on
the list of mandated reporters, given the link between animal
abuse and child abuse. As well, she continued, the task force
recommends that first responders, people employed by OCS and
equivalent agencies, and clergy (with certain exceptions) be on
the list of mandated reporters. Dr. Baldwin-Johnson moved to
the forty-fifth slide and continued outlining the task force's
recommendations. She stated that because kids cannot be
protected from everything, the task force is recommending - in
addition to preventative efforts ongoing support for child
advocacy centers for early and effective intervention.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON displayed the forty-sixth slide, "Another
area of concern: Children with sexual behavior problems". She
proceeded to the forty-seventh slide, "What is it?", and
qualified that those kids who "play doctor with other kids" are
not being talked about here. She deferred to Ms. Heidi Reddick
to discuss this topic further.
3:43:39 PM
HEIDI REDDICK, Board Member, Alaska Children's Justice Act Task
Force, Deputy Director of Operations, Division of Juvenile
Justice (DJJ), Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS),
co-provided a presentation titled, "Alaska Children's Justice
Act Task Force, State of Alaska's Children: 2021 Update." She
noted she serves on the task force board as a child welfare and
criminal justice participant.
MS. REDDICK resumed discussion of the forty-seventh slide. She
stated that over the years several cases and issues have come up
that aren't issues handled by [DJJ] or OCS by the nature of the
way the statutes are written. She presented the [hypothetical]
example of Billy, age 10, who has been having unwanted sexual-
related contact with other kids in his classroom at school.
Billy is removed from school, but OCS doesn't get involved if
OCS cannot substantiate a finding of abuse or neglect by the
parent. Due to his age Billy wouldn't necessarily be referred
for DJJ support or services, and as a result he may not be
referred to a child advocacy center for services. Ms. Reddick
said this type of example has been an identified ongoing problem
for many years, and while it may not happen often it happens
enough that the [task force] thinks it needs to be addressed.
She presented another [hypothetical] example of Johnny, age 9,
who has been reported as having forceful sexual contact with his
8-year-old sister. It could be reported to law enforcement, but
Johnny is too young to prosecute and therefore he is not
forwarded to DJJ and is not necessarily forwarded to a CAC for
referral and services. She said [the task force] is hoping to
identify those gaps and determine if there is a legal way that
those families can be referred to services. But right now, she
advised, it gets "stuck in the pipe" because it doesn't fit all
the right places that it should.
3:45:40 PM
MS. REDDICK skipped the forty-eighth slide and went on to detail
the forty-nineth slide, "Why is this important?" She pointed
out that sexual behavior problems are common, and studies
indicate that 25-40 percent of the offenders on children are
children. She said it may indicate that the child has been
sexually abused or physically abused, neglected, exposed to
pornography, or exposed to adult sexual activity. She advised
that it is an opportunity to protect the child from further
harm. She noted that sexual attraction to children can become
"hardwired" as some studies indicate that 75 percent or more of
adult sex offenders started offending as children at the average
age of 12-14 years old. The kids being talked about here, she
continued, are those who are having sex with their siblings or
neighbors, and they don't fall into the right category to get
referred for services.
MS. REDDICK moving to the fiftieth slide also titled, "Why is
this important?" She explained that this is important because
it has significant impact on both children and their families in
the community. She said treatment at an early age can be very
effective statistics from the National Children's Alliance
show that children aged 7-12 have a 98 percent long-term success
rate and youth aged 13-18 have a 97 percent long-term success
rate. She stated that what [the task force] is talking about is
putting more services in place looking at the emotional
development of the children how they can be supported in their
schools, how to not alienate them, and how families can get the
training and support they need.
3:47:19 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON spoke to the chart on the fifty-first slide,
again titled "Why is this important?" She explained that five
years of data from OCS is represented on the chart. She said
there was a total of 804 screened-in cases of child-on-child
sexual behavior problems. But, she continued, there were 758
cases that didn't meet the initial assessment criteria to be
screened into OCS, so lots of kids are out there needing
services.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON turned to the fifty-second slide, "What are
barriers to helping families?" She pointed out that many cases
don't meet the criteria for OCS, law enforcement, or DJJ. She
explained that if OCS screens out a child, confidentiality
statutes and policies prohibit OCS from sharing information with
other agencies. Additionally, she said, if a school reports a
child with a behavior problem and OCS screens it out, the parent
of that child may not even be aware that a report was made. In
many of these cases, she continued, OCS and law enforcement
response can be intrusive and not welcomed by the family, plus
it may not be the appropriate response. She further pointed out
that parents and local medical or mental health providers may
not be equipped to know how to respond. As a result of these
barriers, she continued, these kids and families fall through
the cracks.
3:49:26 PM
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON drew attention to the fifty-third slide,
"Recommendations". She related that the National Children's
Alliance, an umbrella organization for the child advocacy
centers around the US, has determined that CACs are the best
equipped to see these cases and most CACs in Alaska are ready,
willing, and able to respond to these cases. She advised that
this requires changes to Alaska's MDT statute [AS.14.300], and
to OCS regulations to allow the sharing of information and
referral to OCS or referral to CACs when these cases are
screened out.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON proceeded to the fifty-fourth slide, "Our
data suggests that:". In summary, she stated that: Many Alaska
adults bear the burden of a lifetime accumulation of family
violence and dysfunction; Alaska's children start accumulating
these adverse events early in life and start off "behind the
eight ball" when they are born; Alaska's children and families
bear the burden; and Alaska's economy and society bear the
costs.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON continued to the fifty-fifth slide, "To
reduce this burden we need:". Continuing to summarize, she
stated that what is needed to reduce this burden includes
prevention; early recognition; early, effective, and timely
intervention; effective treatment; and legislation that will
help to better protect children. She said this focus is to have
families that are healthy, stable, safe, and nurturing so that
Alaska's children can be healthy and successful adults and the
communities are wonderful places in which to grow up.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON displayed the photographs on the fifty-sixth
slide, "Build a stronger Alaska". She said [the task force]
wants strong and healthy children rather than children whose
cores have been eaten away by higher doses of adversity. She
moved to the photograph on the fifty-seventh slide, "How will
you be a champion for Alaskan families?", and urged that
legislators be champions for Alaska's kids. She concluded by
showing the fifty-eighth slide depicting credits for the data.
3:52:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS referred to the twenty-nineth slide and
asked about the number of children needing one of the programs
listed on the slide and being reached by these programs versus
children needing one of these programs but not being reached by
the programs. For those children who are not being reached, he
further inquired about what the budget or policy vehicle is that
legislators should consider for closing that gap.
3:53:18 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:53:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS restated his question.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON replied that off the top of her head she
doesn't have the pre-pandemic information on how many kids are
enrolled in all these various programs and how many kids are out
there. She said one estimate is Dr. Parrish's research
[fortieth slide] which estimates the number of unreported
children due to the pandemic.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS stated he would be interested in seeing
this information later.
3:54:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX commented that the committee needs to spend
more time discussing the information on these slides and what
the committee needs to do.
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA concurred with Representative Prax. He
drew attention to the twelfth slide, "ACEs in Alaska: Snapshot",
and inquired about the effect of mental illness in the home on
childhood trauma and which shows the number of 21.9 percent.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON responded that the data comes from the
[2013] Alaska Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey
(BRFSS). She explained that these are the percentages of
Alaskan adults who reported any of these things happening to
them before the age of 18. For example, she said, 11.5 percent
of these adults reported having an incarcerated family member,
14.8 percent reported they had been sexually abused, and 18.7
percent reported witnessing domestic violence.
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA asked whether it is being said that the
mental illness in the home is caused from the abuse.
DR. BALDWIN-JOHNSON answered no. She explained it is what these
Alaskan adults reported that they had experienced there was a
parent or caregiver in their home who was mentally ill - these
are reports of what Alaskan adults experienced when they were
children.
3:58:16 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 3:58 p.m. to 4.00 p.m.
4:00:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ commented that this is important to the
committee as policy makers in adverse childhood experiences.
She noted that the research is about 25 years old, broad, and
well documented. She stated that most of the challenges related
to household function as defined by adverse childhood
experiences are addressable problems, which was seen in the
presentation, and are problems within the committee's
jurisdiction. She pointed out that in addition to the $2.3
billion in annual cost to the state, there is a human cost
each number is a real person who has experienced this and lives
with it for his or her whole life. This also impacts school
readiness, she continued. These linkages cannot be ignored by
policy makers when having conversations about public assistance,
the operating budget, and unemployment. Regarding child sexual
abuse and child on child sexual abuse, for which treatment has
been shown to have long term success, she asked whether there is
adequate treatment within Alaska or whether children must be
sent elsewhere for treatment.
MS. REDDICK replied that those statistics were taken from the
national coalition. She offered her understanding that much of
the treatment at that level is a direct individualized project
and program that can be handled with the referrals from the CAC
to local providers. She agreed there is opportunity there and
said she will get more information [to the committee]. She said
the issue is that current confidentiality laws preclude
referring those families over. She advised that the task force
is continuing to work on it and will bring more information and
possible recommendations on how to address it.
HB 105-DETENTION OF MINORS
4:05:57 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 105, "An Act relating to the duties of
the commissioner of corrections; relating to the detention of
minors; relating to minors subject to adult courts; relating to
the placement of minors in adult correctional facilities; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee,
adopted as a working document on 5/4/21, was a proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 105, Version 32-LGH1576\I,
Radford, 5/1/21 ("Version I").]
4:06:52 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 105, Version I,
labeled 32-GH1576\I.1, Radford, 5/5/21, which read:
Page 1, line 2, following "Services; ":
Insert "relating to the right to representation
by the Public Defender Agency;"
Page 8, following line 4:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 13. AS 18.85.100(a) is amended to read:
(a) An indigent person who is under formal
charge of having committed a serious crime and the
crime has been the subject of an initial appearance or
subsequent proceeding, or is being detained under a
conviction of a serious crime, or is on probation or
parole, or is entitled to representation under the
Supreme Court Delinquency or Child in Need of Aid
Rules or at a review hearing under AS 47.12.105(d), or
is isolated, quarantined, or required to be tested
under an order issued under AS 18.15.355 - 18.15.395,
or against whom commitment proceedings for mental
illness have been initiated, is entitled
(1) to be represented, in connection with
the crime or proceeding, by an attorney to the same
extent as a person retaining an attorney is entitled;
and
(2) to be provided with the necessary
services and facilities of this representation,
including investigation and other preparation."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 33, lines 12 - 13:
Delete "sec. 22"
Insert "sec. 23"
Page 33, line 13:
Delete "secs. 2 - 8 and 22"
Insert "secs. 2 - 8 and 23"
Page 33, line 15:
Delete "sec. 21"
Insert "sec. 22"
Page 33, line 18:
Delete "sec. 21"
Insert "sec. 22"
Page 33, line 25:
Delete "Section 56"
Insert "Section 57"
Page 33, line 26:
Delete "sec. 57"
Insert "sec. 58"
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY objected for discussion purposes.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER explained that Amendment 1 would addresses a
concern relating to the right to representation by the public
defender agency. She deferred to Ms. Nancy Meade to explain the
amendment.
4:07:33 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Alaska Court System, stated that
Amendment 1 could be viewed as a conforming amendment. She
explained that Section 25 of HB 105, Version I, has a provision
for those minors who are waived into adult court; it is a long-
standing part of Alaska statutes that 16- or 17-year-old minors
who have committed more egregious types of crimes are treated as
adults. When minors are treated as adults, they are outside the
juvenile delinquency statutes and are not part of AS 47.12.
However, Sec. 47.12.105, which is added in Section 25, brings
those minors who are otherwise treated as adults under this
chapter just for the only purpose of possibly having a judge
determine where they should be detained, with a preference
expressed generally in that provision for having those minors
detained in a juvenile facility, although a judge can decide
otherwise if requested to do so; for example, if the minor is
particularly violent. That provision in the bill sets out
standards the court must use to make that determination. That
minor is entitled to a hearing every 30 days to make sure that
if they are detained in an adult facility they should stay in
that adult facility, and the judge makes that determination at a
review hearing.
MS. MEADE continued explaining Amendment 1. She said page 18 of
Version I, lines 9-10, state that the waived minor is entitled
to representation at that review hearing, given the minor has
some important rights at issue. She pointed out that when a
statute says somebody is entitled to counsel, if that person is
indigent there needs to be a change to the public defender's
authorization statute to let them represent these folks. So,
while the case is ongoing for an indigent person, the public
defender is defending them because they are an adult accused of
a serious crime. However, some of these minors will have been
sentenced already so the case is closed, the public defender's
representation has ended, but there might still be these review
hearings called for under this provision. Therefore, she
explained, Amendment 1 would amend the public defender's
authority statute, which lists all the things they cover to
authorize them to give them the duty to represent people at
these review hearings. Ms. Meade related that she has spoken
with the public defender's office about this, and the public
defender is fine with it; plus, the public defender probably
will have represented the minor throughout the case and so it
makes sense that they would be the entity to do so. She said
this basically ensures it is covered so a hole isn't caused by
this statute in 47.12 that says that they get an attorney.
4:11:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY offered his understanding that this
process would bring continuity of care representation all the
way through until the person is fully in the Department of
Corrections.
MS. MEADE replied correct, the entity that represented the minor
before will keep doing so for the review hearings that might
occur after the case is otherwise closed.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY removed her objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
4:12:10 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER moved to adopt Amendment 2 to HB 105, Version I,
labeled 32-GH1576\I.2, Radford, 5/5/21, which read:
Page 26, following line 18:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 39. AS 47.12.300 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(i) Except as provided in (f) of this section,
this section does not apply to the records of a minor
who is waived into adult court under AS 47.12.030 or
47.12.100 and is subject to this chapter only to the
extent that AS 47.12.105 applies to the minor."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 33, line 25:
Delete "Section 56"
Insert "Section 57"
Page 33, line 26:
Delete "sec. 57"
Insert "sec. 58"
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY objected for discussion purposes.
CO-CHAIR SNYDER explained that Amendment 2 would add a new
subsection addressing the issue of public records of court cases
as related to waived minors. She deferred to Ms. Meade to
explain the amendment.
4:12:31 PM
MS. MEADE stated that Amendment 2 is a small technical fix. She
explained that under AS 47.12.300, Court Records, the court
records of juvenile delinquency cases are confidential, with
exceptions for victims and foster parents to get access to
information. Waived minors are treated as adults, usually
because the crime they are accused of is more egregious, and
those records like all criminal records are public records. The
statute on court records in the delinquency law says the court's
records prepared under this chapter are confidential. However,
Section 25 of the bill relating to 47.12.105 brings those waived
minors under this chapter for that very small piece of their
case of when the judge determines where they should be housed.
So, in reading the court records provision specifically, those
would be records prepared under this chapter that could be read
to make at least that part of that person's case confidential.
But, Ms. Meade continued, the whole rest of the case is public
because the waived minor is an adult, and it is a criminal case.
Since it makes sense to keep the whole case public, Amendment 2
would write an exception and make public that small portion of a
waived minor's case that is under the 47.12 juvenile delinquency
laws for the purpose of having the judge determine where the
waived minor is detained. Because a waived minor is being
treated like an adult, he or she would not get the benefit of
the confidentiality provision that applies to the other juvenile
delinquency cases.
4:14:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX requested a restatement of the explanation
of Amendment 2.
MS. MEADE responded that minors who are of a certain age who
have committed basically more egregious crimes are treated as
adults, which means their case is public like any criminal case.
But, she continued, the existing law in the juvenile delinquency
rules says that the case of any minor under this chapter is
confidential, which hasn't been a problem because those minors
aren't under this chapter. But, HB 105 would add this chapter
about a judge deciding where these waived minors get housed so
they would now be under this chapter. The question, then, is
whether their case is confidential, but the policy throughout
the statutes is those minors are adults just like any criminal
case. Often the media cares about a case like that, Ms. Meade
noted, and they've always been public. It's almost like a
loophole because the waived minor would get the benefits of
confidentiality, which would conflict with the rest of the
policy reflected that those minors have possibly done the type
of offense that the public has a right to know about. [Under
Amendment 2, waived minors] would not get the benefit of their
case being confidential because they are in an adult world where
criminal cases are all public, the court is transparent, and
people know what is happening with criminal cases.
4:16:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA offered his understanding that Amendment 2
would clarify that [waived minors] don't get privacy because
they are being tried as an adult even though they are still
residing in a juvenile detention center.
MS. MEADE confirmed that that is one way to look at it.
4:17:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX opined that public access has some benefits
and some drawbacks. He stated he is not necessarily interested
in the media getting access to information because generally the
media's interest is to make a spectacle of it, but for those
people who are more intimately involved and have a need for
access the confidentiality gets in the way of doing something
good. He asked whether there is any way to strike a balance.
MS. MEADE answered that the default of Alaska's public access
rules is that all court records are public. Records are only
confidential if a statute, special court order, or court rule
[says so]. She suggested that perhaps a middle ground is that
somebody can always move the court; there can be a discussion if
there is a particular reason to vary from the general rules
about access. A very fundamental one of Alaska's public access
rules is criminal cases are public. There isn't an overall
reason to keep criminal cases confidential, she continued, but
there is for juvenile delinquency because a minor has enhanced
privacy interests. She said there is more of an emphasis on
rehabilitation when it is a Division of Juvenile Justice case
and on outcomes that will enhance the future of that minor so
that the minor doesn't begin or keep on with a life of
criminality. However, Ms. Meade added, a regular criminal case
is public so that people can know what is going on and have
public trust and confidence in what their court system is doing
and in issues that are a matter of public interest.
4:20:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether it is fair to say that for
purposes of this bill it is just whether they fit as a juvenile
or a juvenile is charged as an adult.
MS. MEADE replied that the statutes already contain the decision
that a 16- or 17-year-old who committed a more heinous crime is
an adult for all purposes. It would be a little bit of an
anomaly to say but for confidentiality purposes they get the
juvenile delinquency benefits, she continued, so that is what
this ensures does not happen.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether figuring out that balance
would be worth a discussion at some point, but not as part of
this bill.
MS. MEADE responded that the legislature may want to discuss
that, but it is beyond her area because it would be the
legislature's policy decision. She said she is willing to talk
privately with Representative Prax about the merits of something
like that.
4:21:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA stated that the public and the legislature
need to know what is going on in the court system for the
purpose of accountability. He said he thinks there is a balance
with Amendment 2 because of the protection of privacy that
Alaska has for minors. The whole intent with juvenile justice,
he added, is less toward justice and more toward rehabilitation.
But, he continued, there comes a point where the focus is no
longer on rehabilitation when a 17-year-old, still technically a
minor who will still go to go the juvenile detention center, is
treated legally as an adult because his or her act was
[extremely serious] and not that of a child. There are the
rights of the accused, but there are also the rights of the
victims, he added, and having that public transparency is very
important.
4:23:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether he is correct that the
concern is that this [waived] minor doesn't get any perks, the
minor is being tried as an adult, and all is exposed to the
public. Amendment 2 would clean up the language so that housing
a [waived] minor in the juvenile detention center could not
produce a potential loophole for things the [waived] minor
should not be privileged to.
MS. MEADE confirmed that that is correct.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY removed her objection. There being no further
objection, Amendment 2 was adopted.
4:24:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KURKA commented that the joining of HB 116 with
HB 105 has created a monster of a bill. He said he will
therefore be carefully looking through it to make an informed
decision on the bill's passage.
4:25:04 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER moved to report the proposed CS for HB 105,
Version 32-LGH1576\I, Radford, 5/1/21, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 105(HSS) was
reported out of the House Health and Social Services Standing
Committee.
4:25:33 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:25 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
HB 13-SHARED CHILD CUSTODY: BEST INTEREST
4:30:23 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 13, "An Act relating to shared child
custody; relating to relocation of a child out of state; and
relating to a presumption of the best interests of the child in
child custody and visitation determinations."
4:30:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE RAUSCHER, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, presented HB 13. He explained that HB 13, the
shared parenting bill, recognizes that children deserve both
parents if they are fit, loving, and capable. He said research
has shown children have the most productive outcomes when both
parents are active in their children's life, regardless of
current marital status. The bill intends to mitigate high
conflict situations seen in child custody cases with the
presumption that both parents have equal parenting time in the
best interest of the child, he continued. Current statutes
state neither parent may have preference over the other parent
and allow for 50/50 physical custody to occur, but do not
presume both parents are equal under the law. Representative
Rauscher stated that the government cannot compel parents to be
active parents, but the government can allow for the environment
to occur, except in cases where the mother or father or both
seriously endanger the child's physical, mental, moral, or
emotional health. He said HB 13 would allow for the presumption
to be rebutted through clear and convincing evidence under the
child's best interest guideline [AS 25.25.150(c)]. He further
related that the bill would allow both parents to develop a
[parenting] plan conductive to their child's best interest.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER maintained that current statutes create
a winner-take-all mentality in favor of one parent through at-
fault litigation practices. He stated that if the presumed
custodial parent wins physical or sole custody, conditions for
parental alienation, custodial interference, absence, high
conflict, or ancillary effects such as alcohol, drug abuse, and
mental health collapses can take root if the parent is still
pursuing high conflict methods and tactics. He said HB 13 would
place children first by giving them the opportunity to develop
strong parent-child relationships, place mediation for parenting
plans ahead of litigation, allow for stability by tightening
relocation loopholes, mitigate parental alienation to the
targeted parent and extended family, and strengthen the
intergenerational connection in families. Representative
Rauscher added that he believes shared parenting is a human
right and that children have a human right for a positive,
healthy parent-child relationship regardless of marital status.
4:35:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER provided a sectional analysis of HB 13.
He said Section 1 would add intent language stating the ensuring
of frequent, continuing, and meaningful contact of a child with
each parent and that the shared responsibility is in the best
interest of the child.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER said Section 2 would define parenting
time and state that the best interest of the child is shared
parenting but would allow that presumption to be rebuttable with
clear and convincing evidence that shared physical custody,
joint legal custody, and equal parenting time is not in the best
interest [of the child]. He related that [Section 3] would
require the parents to consult one another when making major
decisions regarding the child's health, education, and general
welfare. He explained that [Section 4] deals with relocation of
a child and would provide for constant procedures from both
parents. It describes the items necessary for a court accepted
parenting plan and would provide for a rebuttal presumption that
a parenting plan, as agreed to by both parents, is in the best
interest of the child.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER specified that Section 5 would amend AS
25.20.090 by replacing the term "child custody" with "physical
custody" or "joint legal custody" and would direct the court on
what factors to consider, such as the child's preference, the
child's needs, home stability, and willingness of each parent to
facilitate a continuing close relationship with the other
parent. He conveyed that Section 6 would allow for the rebuttal
presumption when determining the best interest of a child. He
said Section 7 provides that denial of shared physical custody
or joint legal custody shall be stated on the record.
4:37:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER stated that Section 8 deals with the
modification of a custody visitation order while a parent is
deployed. He related that Section 9 would allow the court to
award attorney fees and cost of actions when attempting to alter
custody awards, and it would direct the court to consider the
financial resources of each party. He said Section 10 provides
definition for joint legal custody and shared physical custody.
He conveyed that Section 11 would provide that determining the
best interest of a child shall [include] two additional factors
the distance between a child's residence and each parent's
residence, and if a parent is incarcerated.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER explained that Section 12 would replace
"joint" physical custody with "shared" physical custody in [AS
25.24.150(g)] regarding a history of domestic violence. He said
Section 13 would provide that the court shall consider false or
frivolous allegations of sexual assault; domestic violence;
child abuse, abandonment, or neglect; or [the providing of]
false or deceptive financial information [to the court]. He
stated that Section 14 would include a parenting plan in the
written agreement of the financial decree of the dissolution.
He said Section 15 would repeal AS 25.20.060(c), which is the
current [subsection] of statute regarding awarding shared
custody to both parents. He concluded by relating that Section
16 would [add a new section] providing that this Act is
applicable to custody orders issued on or after the effective
date of this Act.
4:39:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY expressed his support for HB 13. He said
he still needs to review the bill, but that there is a desperate
need for this, and the courts need direction as to what are the
guidelines.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER stated he doesn't bring HB 13 before the
committee believing it is ready to go out the door. He said he
is open and acceptable to any comments that would make the bill
be what it should be.
4:41:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX remarked that the committee needs to think
about HB 13 quite a bit before acting on it.
4:41:45 PM
CO-CHAIR SNYDER stated she is trying to better understand the
context and scenarios that would be impacted or result from the
proposed legislation. Regarding the need for the bill, she
inquired about the frequency of the problems that the bill is
trying to address.
REPRESENTATIVE RAUSCHER responded that the invited testimony
would help provide an answer.
4:43:03 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY opened invited testimony on HB 13.
4:43:20 PM
DAVID VESPER, Legislative Director, The Fathers' Rights
Movement, provided invited testimony in support of HB 13. He
stated that Alaska has a winner-take-all judicial system for
child situations, and that many Alaskans lack adequate
representation heading into a child custody case. He maintained
that current statutes encourage high conflict relationships
between parents that can result into parental alienation,
domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, criminality, and
mental health issues for the parents, and that children often
suffer from abuse, mental health issues, and challenging
outcomes going into adulthood. These issues can be both inter-
generational and inter-sectional, he added.
MR. VESPER said social science and psychological research shows
that children benefit the most with intact families, but when
this is impractical researchers assert that equal and shared
physical custody offers the next best possible outcomes for
children. He stated that current Alaska statutes do not presume
both parents with equal custody, they only allow it. He cited
Alaska Civil Rule 90.3 as defining joint physical custody as a
period [specified] in writing [in the custody order] of at least
30 percent of the year. However, he continued, no child has
ever said they love one parent 30 percent of the time and the
other parent 70 percent of the time.
4:45:10 PM
MR. VESPER argued that the judge is placed in an uncompromising
position when determining if any allegations cited in the case
go against AS 25.24.150(c) and to what degree. So, he stated,
common tactics in litigation can include allegations of parental
alienation, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, military
status, physical and psychological health, and even immigration
status; all of which have been used against the other parent in
Alaska. The judge must award custody, he continued, which is
much like awarding the winner in this winner-take-all system.
MR. VESPER further argued that this is a human rights issue for
children as well as a civil rights issue. Regarding racism, he
stated that parents who are black, indigenous, or people of
color (BIPOC) are most likely to lose their children then are
white or Asian parents; and BIPOC and bi-racial children are
less likely to be reunited with their parents or the other
parent if that happens. Regarding gender inequities, he said
mothers are awarded either sole custody or primary custody 85
percent of the time. He maintained that these inequities
permeate into the next and succeeding generations or become
intersectional by affecting society with increased drug and
alcohol abuse, lowered education attainments, higher suicide
rates, higher teen-age pregnancy rates, higher crime rates, and
increased sexual, domestic, intimate partner violence. He
stated that fixing the family will begin to fix the issues that
plague Alaska's society and that cost the state millions if not
billions of dollars.
MR. VESPER noted that this type of legislation recently became
law in Kentucky, Arkansas, and West Virginia. He said HB 13
would place mediation ahead of litigation, expand judicial
discretion, address the relocation issue with many Alaskan
families, and preserve the child's best interest standard. In
response to Representative Kurka, Mr. Vesper agreed to provide
the data cited in his testimony.
4:50:44 PM
DIXIE BANNER, State Director, Alaska Fathers' Rights Movement,
provided invited testimony in support of HB 13. She stated she
is representing the grandparent rights integrated into the
family rights. She said both genders are impacted by the
current laws. She related that in her own family the issue has
gone on for 45 years - her mother left when she was five years
old and her father took over the children, now she has gone
through her own traumas, and her son is presently going through
this with his stepson. The system must change, she advocated,
or it will continue.
MS. BANNER noted that abuse and neglect have financial cost to
the state along with human cost. If parents are required to
take accountability for their children, she stated, there will
be fewer social issues. She related that her husband has been
alienated [from his children] for 19 years and the cycle
continues with alienation from his grandchildren. She urged
that this issue be fixed so this broken system will stop. She
said if other states can change the system and reduce domestic
violence, it can also be done in Alaska. She noted she believes
in the parenting plan because it would require that both parents
be involved and held accountable for their children's actions.
4:54:50 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY opened public testimony on HB 13.
4:55:33 PM
ALLEN BAILEY, Esq., testified that he has been a family lawyer
in Anchorage for 37 years and a prosecutor for an additional 10-
11 years. During these years, he related, he has been
representing clients who have been impacted by domestic violence
and their families in family law matters such as child custody,
divorce, custody modification, and relocation.
MR. BAILEY said children are not an animal like a dog or cat so
that time can be divided without affecting their developmental
issues, nor are children an item of property like a truck or an
investment account that can be divided down the middle. He
stated that developments in family law are really society's way
of permitting people who have been victimized, or who would like
to end their relationship, to achieve a future without someone
else controlling them or someone else abusing them. He said he
will submit further written remarks to the committee.
4:57:41 PM
RITA ALLEE, Esq., testified in opposition to HB 13. She said
she has been a domestic relations lawyer in Alaska for 46 years.
She stated that the subject of the complaint is AS 25.24.150,
the statute which addresses the needs of the children, the
capability and desire of the parents to foster those needs, the
child's preference, love, and affection existing between the
parent and child, the length of time the children have been in a
stable environment, the ability of the parties to facilitate the
relationship with the other parent, and questions of domestic
violence and substance abuse in the home. This statute, she
explained, is directly targeted to issues of importance
regarding the best interest of the children, and this statute
requires that the judge hearing the case make findings of fact
on each of these cited elements.
MS. ALLEE related that foundational to Alaska custody law is the
belief that a robust relationship between a child and both
parents is in the best interest of the child. That is
foundational to the court's examination of this issue, she
further related, and there will be a direct finding in each case
regarding facilitation of that relationship by each of the
parties. She stated that the complaint seems to be that it is
necessary to focus on 50/50 timesharing between the parents, the
point of which can only be a focus on fairness to the parents.
She said it's important to recognize that fairness to the
parents is, by definition, not necessarily the same thing as the
best interest of the children. She further stated that Alaska
has a gender-neutral statute closely targeted to the best
interest of the children. The proposed statute, she argued,
focuses on something entirely different, which is fairness to
the parents, and therefore she is opposed to HB 13.
5:00:51 PM
MARIANNA MALLORY testified in opposition to HB 13. She related
her belief that the bill would be harmful to domestic violence
victims and their children. She said the current practice in
Alaska is already shared custody, but it is not presently
mandated. This proposed change in law, she stated, would make
shared custody the standard for all families and raise the
burden on victims to overcome that standard. She maintained
that raising this burden of proof will negatively impact victims
who cannot afford attorneys and do not have the skills of an
experienced litigant.
MS. MALLORY said another matter of concern is the proposed new
best interest factor that adds whether a parent made a false or
frivolous allegation of sexual assault, domestic violence, child
abuse, child abandonment, child neglect, or provided false or
deceptive financial information to the court. She argued that
if a victim is ultimately unable to properly articulate her case
and the crimes committed against her, this new proposed interest
factor would punish her for presenting her concerns at all.
Victims are often inundated with false claims and accusations
from the perpetrator of violence following their reporting, she
continued. Blanket denials of all allegations by the
perpetrator are common, she added, and if the victim does a poor
job presenting her case this bill would increase the ability of
the perpetrator of violence to use the system against the
victim. Ms. Mallory stated that victims of domestic violence,
sexual assault, or child abuse are already often justifiably
skeptical and mistrustful of the Alaska court system, and they
often do not feel it is designed to protect them and their
children. This [proposed] change, she further stated, would
only instill further fear in victims of the justice system while
creating barriers by preventing meaningful access and creating
an order that is not truly in a child's interest.
5:03:50 PM
ALESHA P. testified in opposition to HB 13. She stated that it
sounds like somebody who is an abuser, whether male or female,
woke up one day and said, "I need more rights because it's not
working in the courtroom ? they are ruling against me, and
abusers like me." She said she therefore opposes HB 13.
5:04:31 PM
TARYN BIRD, Esq., testified in opposition to HB 13. She noted
she is a divorce and custody attorney who has specialized in
domestic violence and family law for seven years. She stated
she agrees with Mr. Allen Baily and Ms. Rita Allee regarding
their sentiments and concerns with HB 13, and she agrees with
their position. She said that this proposed legislation ignores
the reality of the landscape of civil divorce and custody cases
in Alaska. Most of [her] litigants, she related, are pro se and
under the current statute it is hard enough as a practiced
attorney to fight for the rights of the victim and for the
safety of children when there is a preponderant standard for the
domestic violence presumption. She argued that HB 13 would
create a windfall to individuals who can afford representation
and would disadvantage those who cannot, which most often are
victims of crimes of domestic violence or children of abuse.
MS. BIRD noted that multiple concerning provisions with this
bill were voiced a few years ago when a similar bill was brought
before this committee, and [concerns] were voiced recently by
many attorneys in Alaska when this legislation was proposed.
She asked the committee to consider what HB 13 fails to say.
What deficiency is this bill addressing? She maintained that
the law presently does not have the issues that have been
presented by the writers of the bill. She said the vaguely
referenced custody issues and statistical facts from other
states do not define the state of Alaska, do not define Alaska's
law, and do not define how Alaska's judges interpret the facts,
look at the evidence, and make a determination in the children's
best interest. The execution of the law by the courts following
the best interest statute, she continued, does lead to good
orders that consider the children's needs and not the parents'
needs.
5:07:27 PM
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY closed public testimony on HB 13. She urged
that anyone else wishing to testify submit their comments online
to the committee.
CO-CHAIR ZULKOSKY announced that HB 13 was held over.
5:08:07 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health and Social Services standing Committee meeting was
adjourned at 5:08 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Key Findings_03_2021.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| CJA Brochure 2016 Update.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| 2017-PSB-Fact-Sheet-Overview-What we Can Do.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| CJA Members List 5-5-20 (002).pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| CJATF2021 Presentation.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| CSA Final Draft.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| Economic Value of Community services for YSBP.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| Harmful Sexual Behavior Framework.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| HB 13 Version A.PDF |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB 13 Sponsor Statement Version A.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB 13 Sectional Analysis version A.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB 105 Amendment 1_Snyder.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB 105 Amendment 2_Snyder.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| HB 105 Detention of Minors Sectional Analysis Version 32 GH1576 I.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| DHSS comparison of HB116 (HB105 or SB91) with notes.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 HB 116 SB 91 |
| CS for HB 105.pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |
| CJATF2021LegV3.1COMPRESSED.pptx |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
Children's Justice Act Task Force |
| DRAFT-HB105-DHSS-PS (003).pdf |
HHSS 5/6/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 105 |