Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 120

02/25/2011 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:12:39 PM Start
01:13:02 PM HB150
02:59:03 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ HB 114 OPT-OUT CHARITABLE GIVING PROGRAM TELECONFERENCED
Scheduled But Not Heard
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 150 PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE ADULTS/MINORS TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held; Assigned to Subcommittee
+= HB 127 CRIMES INVOLVING MINORS/STALKING/INFO TELECONFERENCED
Scheduled But Not Heard
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                       February 25, 2011                                                                                        
                           1:12 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair                                                                                                
Representative Steve Thompson, Vice Chair                                                                                       
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Max Gruenberg                                                                                                    
Representative Lindsey Holmes                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Wes Keller                                                                                                       
Representative Lance Pruitt                                                                                                     
Representative Mike Chenault (alternate)                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 150                                                                                                              
"An Act relating  to the protection of property  of persons under                                                               
disability  and minors;  relating  to the  crime  of violating  a                                                               
protective order concerning  certain vulnerable persons; relating                                                               
to aggravating  factors at sentencing  for offenses  concerning a                                                               
victim  65  years  or  older;   relating  to  the  protection  of                                                               
vulnerable adults; amending Rule  12(h), Alaska Rules of Criminal                                                               
Procedure;  amending   Rule  45(a),  Alaska  Rules   of  Criminal                                                               
Procedure;  amending Rule  65, Alaska  Rules of  Civil Procedure;                                                               
amending  Rule 17,  Alaska Rules  of Probate  Procedure; amending                                                               
Rule  9, Alaska  Rules of  Administration; and  providing for  an                                                               
effective date."                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD; ASSIGNED TO SUBCOMMITTEE                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 114                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to an  opt-out charitable giving program offered                                                               
by an electric or telephone cooperative."                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 127                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to the  crimes of stalking, online enticement of                                                               
a  minor,  unlawful  exploitation  of a  minor,  endangering  the                                                               
welfare  of  a child,  sending  an  explicit  image of  a  minor,                                                               
harassment,  distribution of  indecent  material  to minors,  and                                                               
misconduct involving confidential information; relating to                                                                      
probation; and providing for an effective date."                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 150                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE ADULTS/MINORS                                                                             
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
02/09/11       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/09/11       (H)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
02/23/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
02/23/11       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/23/11       (H)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/25/11       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
KELLY HENRIKSEN, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                     
Human Services Section                                                                                                          
Civil Division (Juneau)                                                                                                         
Department of Law (DOL)                                                                                                         
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented HB 150 and responded to                                                                        
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
TRACI PAIGE, Supervisor                                                                                                         
Adult Protective Services                                                                                                       
Anchorage Office                                                                                                                
Division of Senior and Disabilities Services                                                                                    
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to questions during discussion of                                                              
HB 150.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
RACHEL LEVITT, Director                                                                                                         
Anchorage Office                                                                                                                
Office of Public Advocacy (OPA)                                                                                                 
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to a question during discussion                                                                
of HB 150.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
JOANNE GIBBENS, Deputy Director                                                                                                 
Central Office                                                                                                                  
Division of Senior and Disabilities Services                                                                                    
Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS)                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to  questions during discussion of                                                             
HB 150.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:12:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR CARL  GATTO called the  House Judiciary  Standing Committee                                                             
meeting to order  at 1:12 p.m.   Representatives Gatto, Thompson,                                                               
Gruenberg, Holmes, and Lynn were present at the call to order.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
        HB 150 - PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE ADULTS/MINORS                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:13:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO announced that the  [only] order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE  BILL  NO. 150,  "An  Act  relating  to the  protection  of                                                               
property of persons under disability  and minors; relating to the                                                               
crime  of   violating  a  protective  order   concerning  certain                                                               
vulnerable   persons;   relating   to  aggravating   factors   at                                                               
sentencing for  offenses concerning a  victim 65 years  or older;                                                               
relating to  the protection of  vulnerable adults;  amending Rule                                                               
12(h), Alaska  Rules of Criminal Procedure;  amending Rule 45(a),                                                               
Alaska  Rules of  Criminal Procedure;  amending  Rule 65,  Alaska                                                               
Rules  of Civil  Procedure;  amending Rule  17,  Alaska Rules  of                                                               
Probate   Procedure;   amending   Rule   9,   Alaska   Rules   of                                                               
Administration; and providing for an effective date."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:15:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KELLY  HENRIKSEN,  Assistant  Attorney  General,  Human  Services                                                               
Section,  Civil  Division  (Juneau),  Department  of  Law  (DOL),                                                               
noting that the committee had  previously received an explanation                                                               
of Sections 1 -  7, relayed that Section 8 of HB  150 would add a                                                               
definition  of  the  word,  "fraud"   to  Title  13's  provisions                                                               
pertaining   to   guardianships    and   conservatorships;   this                                                               
definition was taken  from the statutes pertaining  to the Office                                                               
of  Elder Fraud  and Assistance  - AS  44.21.415.   Sections 9-11                                                               
would  alter  provisions  of  Title  18,  and  address  financial                                                               
protective  orders; specifically,  Section  9  would exclude  the                                                               
crime of  violating an ex  parte financial protective  order from                                                               
the list  of crimes subject  to warrantless arrest,  and Sections                                                               
10 and 11  would add financial protective orders  to the registry                                                               
of  protective  orders maintained  by  the  Department of  Public                                                               
Safety (DPS).                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN relayed that [Sections  12-41] pertain to AS 47.24,                                                               
which  governs [the  Department  of Health  and Social  Services'                                                               
(DHSS's)]  adult  protective  services,  which -  much  like  the                                                               
Office  of  Children's  Services   -  receives  and  investigates                                                               
reports of harm to vulnerable  adults and, when there is probable                                                               
cause  to believe  that harm  is occurring,  files petitions  for                                                               
conservatorship or guardianship.   Specifically, Section 12 would                                                               
add  an employee  of an  out-of-home residential  or health  care                                                               
facility, and  an educator or  administrative staff member  of an                                                               
educational institution, to the list of mandatory reporters.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:23:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG noted  that Section  12 would  also add                                                               
the term,  "undue influence" to  AS 47.24.010(a),  and questioned                                                               
why the term, "fraud" isn't being added there as well.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN, mentioning that there  had been discussion on that                                                               
issue, explained that it's because  Title 47 addresses the health                                                               
and  welfare of  vulnerable  adults, whereas  Title 13  addresses                                                               
fraud and  financial matters as  they relate  to conservatorships                                                               
and  so  warranted the  inclusion  of  that term.    Furthermore,                                                               
[Section  41's proposed  AS 47.24.900(21)]  in  part defines  the                                                               
term, "undue influence" as, "deceptively  taking control over the                                                               
decision  making  of  the vulnerable  adult,  including  decision                                                               
making  related  to  finances, property,  residence,  and  health                                                               
care"; therefore, the  term, "undue influence" is  intended to be                                                               
a little bit broader than the concept of fraud.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  acknowledged that point,  but suggested                                                               
that  the  term,  "fraud"  ought  to  be  added  to  proposed  AS                                                               
47.24.010(a) regardless, because doing  so could be beneficial to                                                               
those required to report [suspected harm}.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  pointed out, though,  that there are  already many                                                               
places in AS 47.24 where  the term, "vulnerable adult" along with                                                               
a description of the harm  that makes someone vulnerable - abuse,                                                               
neglect, exploitation,  abandonment, or  self neglect -  is used,                                                               
and so several  sections of the bill are merely  proposing to add                                                               
the  concept  of  "undue  influence" to  those  provisions.    In                                                               
contrast, the term, "fraud" is considered  to be an aspect of the                                                               
already-used term, "exploitation".  In  response to a request and                                                               
a question, she  agreed to research the issue  further, and again                                                               
relayed that  proposed AS 47.24.900(21) defines  the term, "undue                                                               
influence".    That  definition   requires  that  the  action  be                                                               
deceptive  in  nature,  and  although  the  question  of  whether                                                               
someone  is acting  deceptively  is subjective,  if one  believes                                                               
that someone is exerting undue  influence, then one should file a                                                               
complaint with the DHSS's adult  protective services, which would                                                               
then determine whether such is actually the case.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG, in  response to  an earlier  question,                                                               
noted  that the  term, "peace  officer"  - part  of the  existing                                                               
statutory  language in  Sections  9 and  11 -  is  defined in  AS                                                               
01.10.060(a)(7) as:                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     (A) an officer of the state troopers;                                                                                      
     (B) a member of the police force of a municipality;                                                                        
     (C) a village public safety officer;                                                                                       
     (D) a regional public safety officer;                                                                                      
     (E) a United States marshal or deputy marshal; and                                                                         
         (F) an officer whose duty it is to enforce and                                                                         
     preserve the public peace;                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:30:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  -  indicating  that  she  would  be  skipping  an                                                               
explanation of  the sections of  the bill that would  merely make                                                               
conforming changes  regarding the term, "undue  influence" - went                                                               
on  to explain  that  [Section 13]  would  require a  [mandatory]                                                               
reporter  to include  the contact  information of  the vulnerable                                                               
adult in his/her report.  Section  15 would permit anyone to make                                                               
a report of harm, including  a mandatory reporter in his/her non-                                                               
occupational capacity; this language  was taken from the statutes                                                               
pertaining to  the Office of Children's  Services (OCS) regarding                                                               
mandatory reporting.   Section 16  would require a  public safety                                                               
officer to  notify adult protective  services within 24  hours of                                                               
having received a  report of harm that involves  an imminent risk                                                               
of serious physical harm to a vulnerable adult.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG expressed  concern  about Section  16's                                                               
proposal to  delete the words,  ", at the  earliest opportunity,"                                                               
from AS  47.24.010(e).  He  suggested that instead  that language                                                               
should be  moved to where  the proposed new language  of, "within                                                               
24  hours of  receiving the  report of  harm" is  being inserted,                                                               
such  that that  sentence would  then  in part  read, "and  shall                                                               
notify the department  at the earliest opportunity  and within 24                                                               
hours".   Such  a change  would ensure  that the  officer doesn't                                                               
automatically delay notifying the department for 24 hours.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO expressed agreement.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  indicated that such  a change would  be acceptable                                                               
and in keeping  with the administration's goals.   In response to                                                               
questions, she  explained that if  a mandatory reporter  fails to                                                               
report  that a  vulnerable adult  is being  harmed, he/she  could                                                               
face criminal charges; that under  existing AS 47.24.010(e), upon                                                               
receiving  a   report,  a  law  enforcement   officer  must  take                                                               
immediate  action to  protect the  vulnerable adult,  and so  all                                                               
Section  16 is  doing with  regard to  that officer  is requiring                                                               
him/her to also notify adult  protective services within 24 hours                                                               
of receiving the  report; that she's not seen any  cases in which                                                               
an  officer,  once  having  received   a  report  of  harm  to  a                                                               
vulnerable  adult, intentionally  didn't take  action to  protect                                                               
the person; and that she is  unsure what penalty an officer would                                                               
be  subject to  if he/she  doesn't also  notify adult  protective                                                               
services as required.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:36:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TRACI  PAIGE, Supervisor,  Adult  Protective Services,  Anchorage                                                               
Office, Division of Senior  and Disabilities Services, Department                                                               
of Health  and Social Services  (DHSS), added that when  a report                                                               
is made after hours, the  department can't respond until the next                                                               
business  day, and  so  a mandatory  reporter  should instead  be                                                               
reporting  to  a law  enforcement  officer,  who would  then,  as                                                               
required, take immediate action  to protect the vulnerable adult.                                                               
In response  to comments,  she explained that  all of  the DHSS's                                                               
adult protective  services' offices' phone messages  state office                                                               
hours and  direct mandatory reporters to  contact law enforcement                                                               
in emergency  situations arising after  hours.  In response  to a                                                               
question, she  concurred that mandatory reporters  who then don't                                                               
follow those directions wouldn't be complying with the law.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO noted  that in Section 16, language on  page 9, lines                                                               
3-5,  says  that  if  the  reporting  person  cannot  immediately                                                               
contact  the DHSS's  adult protective  services,  then he/she  is                                                               
required to make the report to a law enforcement officer.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  indicated that that  language satisfied                                                               
his concern.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  then explained that  Section 18 would add  two new                                                               
subsections to AS  47.24.010:  proposed new  subsection (i) would                                                               
clarify that a mandatory reporter  is still required to report to                                                               
the DHSS's  adult protective services regardless  that he/she may                                                               
have  also  made a  report  to  his/her  supervisor or  a  fellow                                                               
employee; and  proposed new subsection  (j) would provide  that a                                                               
person  who recklessly  makes  a false  report  would be  civilly                                                               
liable for actual damages suffered  by the subject of the report.                                                               
In  response  to comments  and  a  question, she  clarified  that                                                               
language in  Section 16 regarding bringing an  action for damages                                                               
pertains to actions taken by a  person or an entity attempting to                                                               
do a good thing - attempting to  help a vulnerable adult - and so                                                               
the   damages  would   be  limited   to   only  direct   economic                                                               
compensatory damages  for personal  injury; in  contrast, Section                                                               
18's  proposed new  subsection  (j) would  pertain  to the  civil                                                               
liability of a  person doing a bad thing -  making a false report                                                               
- and so that person would  be civilly liable for actual damages.                                                               
In response  to a further  question, she indicated  that proposed                                                               
AS  47.24.010(j) applies  to reckless  behavior,  rather than  to                                                               
mere  negligent behavior,  because  the  department doesn't  want                                                               
people hesitating to make a report.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:48:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  - relaying that  Sections 19-24 would  merely make                                                               
conforming changes  - explained that  Section 25 would  add seven                                                               
new  subsections   to  AS  47.24.015,   which  pertains   to  the                                                               
department's investigatory  power.   Proposed new  subsection (h)                                                               
would   require  individuals   and  entities   to  provide   [the                                                               
department]  access to  the  health and  financial  records of  a                                                               
vulnerable  adult as  part of  its investigation.   Proposed  new                                                               
subsection  (i)  would prohibit  anyone  from  interfering in  an                                                               
investigation.   Proposed  new  subsection (j)  would allow  [the                                                               
department] to  file a  petition for an  ex parte  order granting                                                               
access   to  records   if  no   petition   for  guardianship   or                                                               
conservatorship  has   been  filed,   and  would   provide  legal                                                               
standards for  obtaining such an order:   there must be  a report                                                               
of harm, and it must be shown  [that either the ex parte order is                                                               
necessary in order  to access the vulnerable adult,  or] that the                                                               
records  are  relevant  to  the   investigation.    Proposed  new                                                               
subsection (k)  would allow adult  protective services  access to                                                               
any departmental  information necessary to  assist in the  case -                                                               
this  concept  was  borrowed  from  the  statutes  pertaining  to                                                               
certification and  licensing.  Proposed new  subsection (l) would                                                               
allow the department to audiotape  or videotape an interview of a                                                               
vulnerable  adult if  he/she  has the  capacity  to give  his/her                                                               
consent and does  so.  Proposed new subsection  (m) would require                                                               
the  department   to  provide  training  to   its  investigators.                                                               
Proposed  new subsection  (n) would  define the  term, "financial                                                               
records".                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN,  in response  to  questions,  explained that  the                                                               
question of whether  a vulnerable adult has the  capacity to give                                                               
consent would  be determined  by the  social worker  handling the                                                               
case;  that   without  that   consent,  the   vulnerable  adult's                                                               
interview cannot be taped; that  Section 25's proposed subsection                                                               
(h)  would  probably not  violate  the  federal Health  Insurance                                                               
Portability  and Accountability  Act  (HIPAA)  because the  HIPAA                                                               
provides  an  exception  allowing certain  entities  to  disclose                                                               
information to  an agency charged  with investigating  reports of                                                               
harm;  that research  of what  other states  are doing  indicates                                                               
that proposed  subsection (h) would not  cause any constitutional                                                               
problems; and  that proposed subsection  (j) reflects  the DHSS's                                                               
desire to  have the courts  determine that  an ex parte  order is                                                               
warranted in  certain situations,  instead of  simply [obtaining]                                                               
subpoena power.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  expressed disfavor with  the department                                                               
having  so much  access to  a person's  financial and  healthcare                                                               
records.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  indicated that the department  is requesting these                                                               
provisions because it  is being stymied in its  efforts to access                                                               
the    vulnerable    adult's    information    when    conducting                                                               
investigations  into  reports  of  harm.   The  department  needs                                                               
access to those  documents, and under provisions of  the bill, it                                                               
could seek  an ex parte  order without  first having to  create a                                                               
court case.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   questioned,  though,   whether  there                                                               
weren't  already   provisions  in  the  Alaska   Rules  of  Civil                                                               
Procedure  that  allow for  obtaining  a  subpoena without  first                                                               
filing a court case.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN relayed  that she  was nescient  regarding whether                                                               
there were.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  expressed concern that  [the provisions                                                               
of Section 25] would run counter to the Fourth Amendment.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:00:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RACHEL  LEVITT,  Director,  Anchorage Office,  Office  of  Public                                                               
Advocacy  (OPA), Department  of Administration  (DOA), agreed  to                                                               
research  that  issue,  noted  that the  OPA's  Elder  Fraud  and                                                               
Assistance  section  already  has  the authority  to  access  the                                                               
financial records of  elders who may be the victims  of fraud and                                                               
financial  exploitation,  and   offered  her  understanding  that                                                               
[Section 25]  would merely  be providing that  same power  to the                                                               
DHSS.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  went on  to  explain  that Sections  26-29  would                                                               
update the  statutes pertaining  to surrogate  decision-makers by                                                               
adding  new   fiduciaries  -  attorneys-in-fact,   trustees,  and                                                               
surrogates for health care decisions  under AS 13.52.030 - to the                                                               
list of those who  may serve in that capacity.   In response to a                                                               
question, she  explained that an attorney-in-fact  is someone who                                                               
holds power  of attorney.   In response to another  question, she                                                               
acknowledged that Section  26 would also delete  language from AS                                                               
47.24.016(a)  that precludes  a  spouse from  being  chosen as  a                                                               
surrogate decision-maker  for a  vulnerable adult if  they aren't                                                               
living  in the  same  domicile, and  indicated her  understanding                                                               
that this  provision of  Section 26  would address  situations in                                                               
which the vulnerable  adult is in a nursing home  or other health                                                               
care facility, for example.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO, noting  that he doesn't live with  his spouse during                                                               
the  legislative session,  expressed favor  with the  deletion of                                                               
that language.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:04:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOANNE  GIBBENS, Deputy  Director,  Central  Office, Division  of                                                               
Senior  and  Disabilities  Services,  Department  of  Health  and                                                               
Social Services (DHSS), concurred  with Ms. Henriksen's summation                                                               
of Section 26,  and that there could be a  variety of reasons the                                                               
vulnerable adult  isn't living with  his/her spouse,  and offered                                                               
her  understanding   that  [other  provisions  of   law]  address                                                               
situations involving domestic violence  (DV) between a vulnerable                                                               
adult and his/her spouse.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  -   commenting  on   the  [potential]                                                               
vagueness of the word, "domicile"  - expressed favor with Section                                                               
26's proposed deletion.   He suggested, though,  that the phrase,                                                               
"permanent separation"  should be added to  Section 26's proposed                                                               
AS 47.24.030(a)(1),  which  currently  precludes  a  spouse  from                                                               
being chosen as a vulnerable  adult's surrogate decision-maker in                                                               
situations  where one  of the  parties has  initiated divorce  or                                                               
dissolution  proceedings.    Observing, then,  that  existing  AS                                                               
47.24.030(a)(2) uses  the term,  "lives with", he  suggested that                                                               
more research  be conducted to  ensure that the provisions  of AS                                                               
47.24.030(a)  are as  flexible and  inclusive as  the DHSS  would                                                               
wish.    For   example,  should  the  [grown]   grandchild  of  a                                                               
vulnerable adult be  included in the list of people  who could be                                                               
chosen  to serve  as the  vulnerable adult's  surrogate decision-                                                               
maker?                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES pointed out  that paragraph (6) of proposed                                                               
AS 47.24.030(a)  allows either  a close friend  or a  relative of                                                               
the vulnerable adult to be  chosen as a surrogate decision-maker,                                                               
and   so  [grown]   grandchildren,  for   example,  are   already                                                               
addressed.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  GATTO observed  that under  AS  47.24.030(a), because  the                                                               
word, "or"  is used at  the end of  paragraph (5), the  DHSS need                                                               
choose only one of the people listed in paragraphs (1)-(6).                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  mentioned that  generally what  she has  found, at                                                               
least  in Southeast  Alaska,  is that  the  department only  gets                                                               
involved with  a vulnerable  adult to  begin with  because he/she                                                               
doesn't already  have someone  trustworthy to  help him/her.   In                                                               
response  to questions,  she offered  her understanding  that the                                                               
reason the  person chosen to  be a surrogate  decision-maker must                                                               
be at  least 18  years old  is because a  minor doesn't  have the                                                               
legal  authority to  enter into  contracts or  make the  kinds of                                                               
decisions that  would be required of  a surrogate decision-maker;                                                               
and  that she  would  research whether  an  emancipated minor,  a                                                               
married minor,  and a minor serving  in the military ought  to be                                                               
included on the list as well.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:12:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  then explained  that Section  30 would  add family                                                               
members, conservators,  and trustees  to the  list of  people who                                                               
may be restrained via a  court injunction from interfering with a                                                               
vulnerable adult's receiving protective services.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked  why that list is  limited and the                                                               
provision doesn't  simply apply to  anyone who interferes  with a                                                               
vulnerable adult's receiving protective services.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  surmised that  it was probably  the choice  of the                                                               
drafter to  simply add the  aforementioned three types  of people                                                               
to the current  list rather than expand the  provision to include                                                               
everyone,  but  indicated  the DHSS's  interest  in  having  this                                                               
provision apply to everyone.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  questioned what  would constitute  a "family                                                               
member" [for purposes of this provision].                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  indicated  that  the  department  would  be  more                                                               
concerned with  the fact that  the interference was  occurring at                                                               
all rather than with who was  doing the interfering, and so would                                                               
take action regardless.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  GATTO,   in  response  to   a  suggestion   regarding  how                                                               
Section 30  could   be  changed,   mentioned  that   a  committee                                                               
substitute (CS) would be a forthcoming.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:17:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN went on to  explain that Sections [33-41] would all                                                               
address  [the  definitions  laid   out  in  AS  47.24.900];  some                                                               
sections add  new definitions  and some  just clarify  and update                                                               
existing definitions  to reflect the DHSS's  current practice and                                                               
understanding  of  how  "these   systems"  work.    Specifically,                                                               
Section  33  would   amend  the  definition  of   "abuse"  in  AS                                                               
47.24.900(2)(A) such  that it would  also include  the infliction                                                               
of emotional  distress, and  the infliction  of fear  - including                                                               
coercion and intimidation.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked  why Section 33 is  also proposing to                                                               
delete the word, "wilful" from AS 47.24.900(2)(A).                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN explained  that that change was  recommended by Ms.                                                               
Carpeneti of the  DOL's Criminal Division and  reflects that that                                                               
term  generally isn't  used  anymore  and is  for  the most  part                                                               
subsumed by the already-included term, "intentional".                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES  questioned what the difference  is between                                                               
mental distress  and emotional distress,  and what it  would take                                                               
to prove either of them.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS.   HENRIKSEN,  indicating   that   she   would  provide   more                                                               
information to  the committee at  a later date, relayed  that the                                                               
concept  [of those  two  different states  of  being] was  partly                                                               
borrowed  from  other  states'  laws  and  partly  borrowed  from                                                               
Alaska's OCS laws,  and that this language was intended  to be as                                                               
inclusive  as  possible,  though   the  DHSS  would  probably  be                                                               
amenable to having it altered.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   questioned   whether   the   phrase,                                                               
"coercion  and intimidation"  should  instead  be, "coercion  and                                                       
duress", and suggested that Section 33 warranted further review.                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN -  in response to comments  and questions regarding                                                               
Section 32 [which would make  a conforming change to AS 47.24.130                                                               
regarding the  term, "undue influence"]  - noted  that "treatment                                                               
by spiritual means through prayer  alone" must be consented to by                                                               
the  person,  must  be  [that  of  the  person's  own  church  or                                                               
religious  denomination,   and  must   be]  administered   by  an                                                               
accredited practitioner  of the person's own  church or religious                                                               
denomination.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES added  her understanding  that Section  32                                                               
merely clarifies  that [AS  47.24] may not  be construed  to mean                                                               
that  a person  is  being unduly  influenced, abused,  neglected,                                                               
self-neglected,   vulnerable,  unable   to  consent,   abandoned,                                                               
exploited, or in need of  emergency or protective services simply                                                               
because  he/she   chooses  to  receive  treatment   only  through                                                               
spiritual prayer.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   questioned  whether   the  protection                                                               
afforded by AS  47.24.130 would also apply in  situations where a                                                               
person chooses  to receive  or not  receive a  particular medical                                                               
treatment based on his/her philosophical beliefs.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN explained  that if  a person  has the  capacity to                                                               
make a particular  health care decision, then  [the State] cannot                                                               
interfere, and that a person's  surrogate is legally obligated to                                                               
follow his/her  known wishes.   However, if there  is conflicting                                                               
information  regarding  what  those  wishes might  be,  then  the                                                               
DHSS's  adult protective  services can  seek assistance  from the                                                               
courts.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG mentioned  that he  would be  reviewing                                                               
Section 32 further.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:36:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  then  explained  that Section  34  would  add  an                                                               
employee of  an in-home  care provider to  the definition  of the                                                               
term,  "caregiver".    The   existing  definition  only  includes                                                               
[family  members,] volunteers,  people working  on contract,  and                                                               
people who are complying with a  court order; employees of an in-                                                               
home  care provider  don't necessarily  have their  own contract,                                                               
and so  Section 34 would  bring the definition of  "caregiver" up                                                               
to  date.   Section  35  would  add  a  definition of  the  term,                                                               
"informed  decision" to  the definition  of  the term,  "decision                                                               
making capacity";  an "informed decision"  would be defined  as a                                                               
decision made free from undue  influence.  Section 36 would amend                                                               
the definition  of the term,  "exploitation" in order  to capture                                                               
the concepts of deception and undue influence.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG,  turning attention back to  Section 35,                                                               
opined that defining  the term, "informed decision"  to only mean                                                               
a decision made free from  undue influence doesn't go far enough;                                                               
that term  should instead be defined  to mean a decision  that is                                                               
both free from undue influence and that is informed.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN offered her belief  that the existing definition of                                                               
the  term,  "decision  making  capacity",  meaning  in  part  the                                                               
ability to understand and appreciate  the nature and consequences                                                               
of a decision, doesn't make  sense unless there is the assumption                                                               
that the person has been informed.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  pointed out, though, that  that concept                                                               
is  not specifically  included  in the  definition  of the  term,                                                               
"informed decision",  and again opined  that it should  be, since                                                               
one could  be free of  undue influence  but still be  ignorant of                                                               
the essential facts.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:38:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  remarked  that  "the only  way  we  could  assess                                                               
whether they ...  appreciate the nature and  consequences of that                                                               
specific decision is if ...  they've been given the information."                                                               
She offered her belief, though,  that the administration wouldn't                                                               
object to such a change.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN pointed  out, though,  that some  people may                                                               
not want  to be informed  about certain facts; for  example, some                                                               
people may not wish to know they have a terminal disease.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN then acknowledged  that someone's ability to assess                                                               
and  understand the  consequences  of his/her  decision could  be                                                               
assessed  [by the  DHSS]  without the  person  having a  specific                                                               
piece of information.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO remarked that a person  could make a decision about a                                                               
specific  course of  action  he/she wants  taken  in the  future,                                                               
while stating that  he/she doesn't want to be  informed about the                                                               
details surrounding that course of  action whenever it finally is                                                               
undertaken.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  said, "That  may be satisfied  when the                                                               
definition  of 'informed  consent'  means, 'informed  of all  the                                                               
essential elements', and in that  case, it would be irrelevant in                                                               
the legal sense, because it wouldn't make a difference."                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN clarified that Section  35 - rather than addressing                                                               
the  specific  level of  information  a  person  must have  -  is                                                               
intended to  ensure that no  one is pressuring  a person to  do a                                                               
particular thing.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested, then,  that the word, "means"                                                               
as used  on page 16, line  24, should be replaced  with the word,                                                               
"includes".                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN agreed that that wording would be more precise.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:43:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN  went on to  explain that Section 37  would clarify                                                               
the definition of  the word, "neglect".  Section  38 would update                                                               
the  definition of  the term,  "protective  services" by  listing                                                               
specific  examples;  "protective   services"  are  services  that                                                               
alleviate the  harm resulting from undue  influence, abandonment,                                                               
exploitation, abuse,  neglect, or  self-neglect, and that  may be                                                               
provided with  the consent  of the  vulnerable adult,  of his/her                                                               
decision maker, or of the  DHSS's adult protective services in an                                                               
emergency.    Section 39  would  clarify  the definition  of  the                                                               
phrase,  "unable  to  consent".    Section  40  would  amend  the                                                               
definition of  the term,  "vulnerable adult"  such that  it would                                                               
track   specific  language   in   the   statutes  pertaining   to                                                               
guardianships  and to  conservatorships  that set  out the  legal                                                               
standard for the appointment of a guardian or conservator.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN,  in response  to a question  about Section  40 and                                                               
its use  of the  term, "chronic", explained  that with  regard to                                                               
how a  mandatory reporter  would know when  to report,  if he/she                                                               
suspects that  a person  is vulnerable, the  best thing  would be                                                               
for  the mandatory  reporter to  report  it; doing  so but  being                                                               
mistaken won't result in any  penalties, whereas neglecting to do                                                               
so would.   In response  to comments,  she agreed to  provide the                                                               
committee  with   definitions  of   [the  terms,   "chronic"  and                                                               
"advanced age"].                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:48:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  HENRIKSEN  then  explained that  Section  41  would  provide                                                               
definitions  for   the  terms,  "deception",   "fiduciary  duty",                                                               
"financial  institution", "person  who  stands in  a position  of                                                               
trust  or  confidence", and  "undue  influence".   The  remaining                                                               
sections of  the bill, Sections  42-47, address  proposed changes                                                               
to uncodified law  and establish an effective date.   In response                                                               
to  a  question regarding  Section  41,  she indicated  that  the                                                               
proposed  definition of  the  term,  "financial institution"  was                                                               
taken from existing Alaska statute,  and that the definitions for                                                               
the other terms were gleaned from other states' [laws].                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   turned  attention  to   Section  41's                                                               
proposed definition  of the term, "undue  influence", and pointed                                                               
out that although  it specifies that the term means  a person has                                                               
acted deceptively,  not all instances of  undue influence involve                                                               
deception.   Furthermore, Section  36's proposed addition  to the                                                               
definition  of  the  term, "exploitation"  uses  both  the  term,                                                               
"under influence" and  the term, "deception".   He suggested that                                                               
those definitions  be revisited to  ensure that they  satisfy the                                                               
administration's intentions.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. HENRIKSEN acknowledged those points.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   expressed  concern   regarding   the                                                               
language  that would  be added  to the  Alaska Rules  of Criminal                                                               
Procedure via Section  42, and suggested that  the "120-day rule"                                                               
pertaining to continuances [in  criminal cases] warranted further                                                               
review as  does the  similar rule  in the  Alaska Rules  of Civil                                                               
Procedure.   "If you're  changing rules,  make sure  that they're                                                               
all changed and that they're changed right," he concluded.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR GATTO,  in response  to a  suggestion and  upon determining                                                               
that there were no objections,  assigned HB 150 to a subcommittee                                                               
chaired by Representative Gruenberg.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:59:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no  further business before the  committee, the House                                                               
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 2:59 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB114 Sponsor Statement Version M 02-16-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Sectional Analysis Version M 02-16-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 CS(LC) Version M 02-16-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Version A 01-21-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Explanation of Changes Version A to M 02-16-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Fiscal Note CS(LC)-LAW-CIV-02-17-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Supporting Documents-Email Molly Brann 02-14-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Supporting Documents-Explanation of Goodcents 01-2011.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Supporting Documents-Letter Cordova Electric 02-04-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Supporting Documents-Letter Homer Electric 02-04-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Supporting Documents-Table Electric Cooperatives 02-04-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB114 Proposed Amendment M.2 02-24-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 114
HB127 CS(JUD) Version M 02-24-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 127
HB127 Proposed Amendment M.1 02-24-11.pdf HJUD 2/25/2011 1:00:00 PM
HB 127