Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/05/1998 03:30 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 5, 1998
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chairman
Representative Joe Green, Vice Chairman
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative J. Allen Kemplen
Representative Tom Brice
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Al Vezey
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
* HOUSE BILL NO. 375
"An Act relating to children in need of aid matters and
proceedings; relating to murder of children, criminally negligent
homicide, kidnapping, criminal nonsupport, the crime of indecent
exposure, and the crime of endangering the welfare of a child;
relating to registration of certain sex offenders; relating to
sentencing for certain crimes involving child victims; relating to
the state medical examiner and reviews of child fatalities;
relating to teacher certification and convictions of crimes
involving child victims; relating to access, confidentiality, and
release of certain information concerning the care of children,
child abuse and neglect, and child fatalities; authorizing the
Department of Health and Social Services to enter into an
interstate compact concerning adoption and medical assistance for
certain children with special needs; authorizing the establishment
of a multidisciplinary child protection team to review reports of
child abuse or neglect; relating to immunity from liability for
certain state actions concerning matters involving child protection
and fatality reviews and children in need of aid; relating to
persons required to report suspected child abuse or neglect;
relating to foster care placement and to payment for children in
foster and other care and the waiver of certain foster care
requirements; relating to the access to certain criminal justice
information and licensure of certain child care facilities;
amending Rule 218, Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure; amending
Rules 1, 3, 15, 18, and 19, Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 375
SHORT TITLE: CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN/FOSTER CARE
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/02/98 2200 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
02/02/98 2201 (H) HES, JUDICIARY, FINANCE
02/02/98 2201 (H) INDETERMINATE FN (GOV/VARIOUS DEPTS)
02/02/98 2201 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
02/26/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/26/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/03/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/03/98 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/05/98 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
KAREN PERDUE, Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0601
Telephone: (907) 465-3030
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented comments and an overview of HB 375.
RUSSELL WEBB, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
P.O. Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0601
Telephone: (907) 465-3030
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented comments and an overview of HB 375.
SUSAN G. WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General
Human Services Section, Civil Division
Department of Law
1031 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-1994
Telephone: (907) 269-5100
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of the Division of
Family and Youth Services portion of HB 375.
WALTER GAUTHIER
Box 2246
Homer, Alaska 99603
Telephone: (907) 235-2809
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
EUGENE ALTIG
4396 Al Cory Road
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-4216
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
SUZETTE GRAHAM
P.O. Box 383
Kenai, Alaska 99611
Telephone: (907) 776-8658
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
BLAIR MCCUNE, Deputy Director
Public Defender Agency
Department of Administration
900 West 5th Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-0290
Telephone: (907) 264-4400
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
MICHAEL COONS, Paramedic
P.O. Box 4229
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 745-6779
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
DIANA BUFFINGTON, President and State Coordinator
Children's Rights Council of Alaska; and
Chairman, Alaska Task Force on Family Law Reform
314 Maple Street
Kodiak, Alaska 99615
Telephone: (907) 486-2290
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
HARRY NIEHAUS
P.O. Box 55455
North Pole, Alaska 99705
Telephone: (907) 488-9328
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
CINDY HOUSER, Foster parent
HC 2, Box 596
Kasilof, Alaska 99610
Telephone: (907) 262-7937
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
JOHNNY GRAMES, Representative
DADS-Alaska
P.O. Box 100827
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Telephone: (907) 274-3237
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
MARCI SCHMIDT, Representative
Parents United for Custodial Justice
2040 Fishhook
Wasilla, Alaska 99654
Telephone: (907) 357-3618
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
SCOTT CALDER
P.O. Box 73893
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707
Telephone: (907) 456-2866
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
BRADLEY LAYBOURN
700 North Wasilla Fishhook Road
Wasilla, Alaska 99654
Telephone: (907) 373-7786
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 375.
CAROL PALMER, Representative
Parents United for Custodial Justice
P.O. Box 2402
Palmer, Alaska 99645
Telephone: (907) 746-2863
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
MARVIN BERGESON, M.D.
Tanana Valley Clinic
1001 Noble Street
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Telephone: (907) 459-3520
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 375.
GARY MAXWELL
733 West 4th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone: (907) 277-1283
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
SUZANNE GOODRICH
191918 Jaime Drive
Eagle River, Alaska 99577
Telephone: (907) 277-2554
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
MARTHA HODSON
P.O. Box 3687
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Telephone: (907) 260-9156
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 375.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 98-20, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN CON BUNDE reconvened the House Health, Education and
Social Services Standing Committee meeting at 3:30 p.m. Members
present were Representatives Bunde, Green, Porter, Dyson, Kemplen
and Brice. Representative Vezey was absent.
HB 375 - CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN/FOSTER CARE
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the committee would begin considered
HB 375, "An Act relating to children in need of aid matters and
proceedings; relating to murder of children, criminally negligent
homicide, kidnapping, criminal nonsupport, the crime of indecent
exposure, and the crime of endangering the welfare of a child;
relating to registration of certain sex offenders; relating to
sentencing for certain crimes involving child victims; relating to
the state medical examiner and reviews of child fatalities;
relating to teacher certification and convictions of crimes
involving child victims; relating to access, confidentiality, and
release of certain information concerning the care of children,
child abuse and neglect, and child fatalities; authorizing the
Department of Health and Social Services to enter into an
interstate compact concerning adoption and medical assistance for
certain children with special needs; authorizing the establishment
of a multidisciplinary child protection team to review reports of
child abuse or neglect; relating to immunity from liability for
certain state actions concerning matters involving child protection
and fatality reviews and children in need of aid; relating to
persons required to report suspected child abuse or neglect;
relating to foster care placement and to payment for children in
foster and other care and the waiver of certain foster care
requirements; relating to the access to certain criminal justice
information and licensure of certain child care facilities;
amending Rule 218, Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure; amending
Rules 1, 3, 15, 18, and 19, Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules; and
providing for an effective date." He noted that Commissioner
Perdue would outline the Administration's suggested changes to deal
with child abuse by presenting an overview. The meeting was being
teleconferenced to Anchorage, Fairbanks, Kenai, Homer, Kodiak and
Mat-Su. He asked Commissioner Perdue to begin her overview.
Number 0110
KAREN PERDUE, Commissioner, Department of Health & Social Services,
said she planned a 15-minute overview of some of the studies and
audits the division completed which led to the drafting of the
child protection legislation, and would then proceed with the
actual overview of HB 375.
Number 0159
COMMISSIONER PERDUE explained that graphic 1 shows the division
received 15,547 reports of harm, representing about 10,638 children
in FY 97. The screening process screened out about 1,279 which
were just not appropriate for the child protection agency, leaving
10,529 cases. She directed the committee's attention to the
adjusted workload of 3,739 cases which she wanted to discuss. The
division, in conjunction with the court, takes custody of about 8
percent of the children that are brought to the division's
attention in any one year. She said one of the questions in front
of the committee is where should the custody line be drawn. She
suggested that perhaps the custody line is too conservative; in
other words, the division is not going into enough cases and taking
custody of children. Of those children who do come into the
custody of the system, almost all of them go home, which is as it
should be. But there are children who cannot return home and for
whom there needs to be permanent placement.
Number 0293
COMMISSIONER PERDUE continued graphic 2 indicates that 58 percent
of the calls received are neglect, 27 percent are physical abuse,
13 percent are sexual abuse and the remaining 2 percent are other.
Nearly 70 percent of all reports of harm received by the division
involve children under ten years of age; a good percentage begin at
the age of six when children start school.
Number 0359
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said when she came into her position as
commissioner, her perception was that a lot of the calls came from
older children, especially the sexual abuse reports. However, the
largest number of reports of harm for sexual abuse involve children
under ten years of age.
Number 0402
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said graphic 5 depicts the mandated reporters
of harm in 1997 with school teachers being the number 1 mandated
reporters to the division. A large number are anonymous callers,
and she believes it is important to protect the anonymity of people
calling. The division receives a number of calls from relatives,
as well as doctors.
Number 0454
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said the division has seen a major increase,
about 13 percent, in the number of reports of harm since July 1997
and a 60 percent increase in custody filings. She was of the
opinion that public awareness of child abuse as well as the system
becoming more acutely attuned to child safety has contributed to
the increase in reportings. There's a record number 1,600 children
in state custody, but over the last six months, 1,655 reports that
should have been investigated were screened out due to the
workload. She enthusiastically reported the division is at the
highest staffing level in seven years with only 12 social worker
vacancies statewide.
Number 0532
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said in identifying some key issues in the
system, she began with the 1992 legislative audit, the divisions's
last legislative audit, which pointed out a number of issues
regarding the structure of the division. The division had been
reorganized in 1991 into a regional structure, and in looking at it
now, the commissioner believed it was done with the very best of
intentions, but a number of things have occurred. First, there are
blurred lines of responsibility and authority so that no one person
was in charge of child protection and no one person in charge of
youth corrections. She believed that over time, that has caused
the system to build up inconsistencies between regions and some
lack of accountability. The audit also pointed out the division
lost between five and ten direct line service staff, which began
the process where less and less calls were being investigated.
Number 0643
COMMISSIONER PERDUE continued the division established an internal
evaluation, research and development unit in 1996 to do ongoing,
consistent audits of the functions. Over the next two years, she
requested five separate internal reviews of the division trying to
determine what was going on and to identify changes that would be
most productive. The five audits included targeted reviews of the
Anchorage office. After an administrative review of the Anchorage
office, it was determined that each and every open case in the
Anchorage area would be looked at and the University of Washington
was brought in to complete that project. A defining moment in her
time as commissioner was the death of a child in Fairbanks, at
which time she and other cabinet members asked for an investigation
to determine what could have been done differently. In August,
Judge Reese ordered that five cases be opened to the public and
reviewed. She asked the Kempe Center, a national center of experts
in child abuse and neglect, to review those five cases to determine
if there were some common elements in those cases. Also, as a
result of that effort, an audit referred to as the 6+ review was
conducted of each and every child in the system statewide that had
six or more reports of harm in the last three years. Some very
basic questions were asked in the 6+ review: 1) Are these children
safe; 2) was each report of harm accurately assessed; and 3) was
appropriate action taken to assure the safety of those children?
Number 0783
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said it was mind boggling to her that six or
more reports of harm had been reported to the division for 838
children in 475 families, but these children were not in state
custody. Divisional line workers were asked to go to the various
sites and review the files, which in some cases were as long as a
file drawer. It was a very time consuming task, involving about
1200 staff hours over a six week period. This review revealed that
78 cases involving 131 children needed further investigation. Home
visits were done on each of these cases and children in six of the
cases were taken into state custody. Commissioner Perdue said the
audit was a defining issue in that it helped to understand just how
many children were in a situation of being reported to the division
multiple times and were the necessary policies and laws in place to
protect those children.
Number 0862
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said the audit revealed some disturbing
problems. Chronic substance abuse was a factor in more than 80
percent of child abuse or neglect cases and domestic violence was
a factor in nearly 60 percent of the cases; were workers
adequately equipped to deal with the issue of substance abuse and
the chronicity of it; what was the policy of going into the home
and finding substance abuse but not finding children necessarily
with broken bones, bruises, et cetera; was there enough interfacing
with the domestic violence and police community on the domestic
violence issues; and too many reports of harm were never
investigated, even among the most serious at risk children.
Number 0910
COMMISSIONER PERDUE referred to the next chart showing information
from the audit and said basically, the division had had a policy of
workload adjusting, which probably made some sense when it was
implemented. Workload adjusting meant getting to the most serious
cases first; e.g., if there was too much work in a day, the staff
would try to take care of children who were most in trouble. She
explained that over time, cases in the lower priority level 3 were
never responded to in some offices. For example, of the case
samples in the northern region, there were about 3,235 reports of
harm, but only 53 percent of those reports on the children looked
at were actually investigated. So, even in the most serious cases,
over 20 percent of the reports of harm that came in on those
children were not looked into. A review of the total system
revealed that was the case for about 25 percent of the reports of
harm received. She said that most of these were neglect cases, and
the division learned that what the reporter was reporting was not
necessarily what was happening to the child; the situation could
have been better or worse. She said this is a very serious
situation because the safety of the children cannot be guaranteed.
She was aware that many jurisdictions do a triage system, but the
level of the workload adjusting was beyond her comfort level.
Number 1018
COMMISSIONER PERDUE pointed out that AS 47.17.030 states "The
Department shall, for each report received, investigate and take
action ... that may be necessary to prevent further harm to the
child or ensure the proper care and protection of the child." She
said that clearly is not being done. That is where the philosophy
of zero tolerance came about and that resources do need to be
expended to investigate each report. She asked Russ Webb to
discuss the other areas discovered in the audits.
Number 1046
RUSSELL WEBB, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Health & Social
Services, said the audit findings were clear there was a lack of
consistent practice between regions of the state and that the child
protection system, based on its organizational structure, was not
really managed as a system, but as three separate systems which
resulted in three different sets of practices. Additionally, it
was found that record keeping of case documentation was not
adequate; some of which had to do with lack of time on the part of
staff, high workload and inadequate training. A lack of
coordination was found between and among agencies with child
protection system responsibilities; there was clearly a need to
better share information available so that good decisions can be
made; and a need for regular mechanisms and protocols for agency
coordination. The audit also revealed that a "single event"
approach to child protection was being taken among division staff;
i.e., the focus was too limited in determining the substantiation
of a particular allegation rather than looking at the cumulative
risk. Also, as mentioned previously, was the overlap in substance
abuse and domestic violence.
Number 1147
MR. WEBB said, "Not mentioned on this, but I think critical and
something we'll get to later on is what we found out about our laws
- that really the laws drive the practice in many respects and
there are some real limits in terms of practice, based on the laws
we have today." He discussed the staffing situation, which has
been an issue, but the division is in better shape today with only
three budgeted vacancies than it has been since 1992. Admittedly,
there has been high turnover and vacancy in child protection for
quite some time, which is not unusual given that it's stressful
work, made more stressful by lack of training and high workloads.
Number 1216
MR. WEBB stated the audit also pointed out that Alaska's caseloads
certainly exceed the national standards established by the Child
Welfare League, which impacts the practice and the ability to
intervene and protect children. Also, he has seen the training
system created and destroyed on a couple of occasions. Inadequate
training of staff makes practice not as effective as it should be,
and a good, comprehensive training system did not exist the last
few years. The expectations of supervisors have not been clearly
defined and there wasn't a good system of supervisory quality
assurance. He commented the world is a different place than it was
25 years ago when he entered child protection work. Case workers
now go into some very unsafe places and situations. Also, the
audit revealed there is clearly a shortage of foster homes and
other residential care placements. As the juvenile facilities have
become overcrowded, the residential child care facilities are being
utilized for delinquent children, making foster homes critical for
children in need of aid. Adequate training has not been made
available for foster parents and there's been no respite care
provided. He stressed the importance of case workers making
regular contact with foster parents and having time to provide
support to foster parents.
Number 1345
MR. WEBB said that delays in the court process and in the case work
process prevent the division from getting children out of the
system and into safe, permanent homes as quickly as it should. He
said, "Right now, as I understand it in Anchorage, even if you are
prepared to move towards termination of parental rights based on
long standing facts, if you try to schedule a hearing today it will
be a year from now before you will actually try that case." In the
life of a child, that's way too long.
Number 1375
COMMISSIONER PERDUE directed the committee's attention to a
document listing 400 children in state custody who probably would
not be going home; these are children legally free for adoption
having very high needs or children in a status where reasonable
efforts have been made and the state is now moving towards
guardianship or termination of parental rights. Barriers these
children have often include fetal alcohol syndrome, fetal alcohol
effects; they are not simple children to place. She said this
points out there are children languishing in foster care who really
need to move on into safe, loving homes; many of the children are
in safe, loving homes now, but their permanence is not guaranteed.
In fact, one of the concerns foster parents have is if they raise
the issue legally, the children will be returned home. She said,
"This is evidence of the fact that we do have children stuck in our
system right now who we need to both invest the resources legally
in getting them freed, invest them in the adoption efforts, which
we are doing now with Catholic Social Services, and we've got some
travel entities helping us find adoptive homes and then also
looking at our legal system to see how the laws work." If this
isn't done, the foster system will continue to grow as more
children come into the system.
Number 1471
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said other problems the division has identified
is that police officers and others in the community say that
children are left at risk too long. Certainly with children who
are reported multiple times, the question continues to be, "how
long is it safe to leave a child in a home?" Often in helping
parents with substance abuse for instance, the children are
returned immediately to the parent once treatment has been
completed without adequate after care and support for the parent,
so the children end up coming back into the system. She sensed
there was a feeling in the system that in some cases too much of
the division's resources were being spent on making "reasonable
efforts" for some families year after year.
Number 1522
COMMISSIONER PERDUE stated, "And then finally, a fact that we
discovered as we were working through some of this material, was
that some child fatalities caused by child abuse and neglect were
not going detected in our state. In fact, we had evidence to
believe that approximately between 6 and 15 child deaths had
occurred in just infants from the years 1992 - 1995 that were not
brought to the attention of the authorities and prosecuted."
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said she felt overwhelmed by the amount of
issues when the audit was completed. She cautioned that when
looking at change, it's important to get strategic and focus on
those things that will make the most difference. With that she
began to address HB 375. As mentioned earlier, children's deaths
were going undetected because there was no mechanism in place; in
fact, Alaska was the only state that didn't have a child fatality
review team. She asked Mr. Webb to update the committee on what's
been done so far.
Number 1596
MR. WEBB said that a permanent child fatality review team was
established last May through the office of the state medical
examiner with a law enforcement officer, state trooper, prosecutor
and a child protection worker involved as part of that multi-
disciplinary review process. Since July the team has looked at 61
deaths, identified 8 homicides, 10 suicides, 12 children who died
of natural causes, and 31 accidental deaths. House Bill 375
establishes the child fatality review team in statute. He
explained that it was established under existing law, but it needs
to be cleaned up.
Number 1635
CHAIRMAN BUNDE recalled a couple of years ago a team reviewing
sudden infant deaths and their comments indicating there were
probably more homicides than accidental deaths, but people on the
team were prevented from reporting these homicides. He was
optimistic the child fatality review team would not be in a
similar situation.
MR. WEBB responded, "In part, this was designed to resolve that
problem and the person who removed himself from that team is a
member this team."
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER inquired if there had been a situation
whereby an individual was aware of a homicide and was somehow
precluded by law from reporting it.
MR. WEBB replied, "They were retrospective reviews of child deaths
over a period of years; they were identified long after the fact as
being suspected at this point; weren't identified initially; based
on the facts, as the team gathered all those facts, under existing
law now, a review established under law with rules of
confidentially statutorily which enables them to gain information
that they couldn't otherwise gain, were precluded from using that
information outside for those prosecutorial purposes and other
purposes. That was a problem."
CHAIRMAN BUNDE remarked he had been outraged when he had heard
about the situation. The individual who resigned from the team was
a police officer.
Number 1717
COMMISSIONER PERDUE believed that more child deaths would be
discovered and while it may be shocking, the system is working to
uncover things that may have previously gone undetected.
COMMISSIONER PERDUE advised the committee that the agency had been
restructured to improve the accountability. The restructuring was
aided by the passage last year of HB 6 which divided the juvenile
code and the child code into two separate areas. The division
believes in zero tolerance; in other words, all reports of harm
checked out. To that end, the division is considering triple-track
pilot projects which allow the agency to work with community
agencies to investigate some of the less-risk cases and the
addition of staff workers to check out the reports. She noted the
division has identified federal funds to request to fund most of
the additional workers. The division is working with the Child
Welfare League of America Center for Excellence to train and assist
supervisors. She noted the division, in partnership with the
University of Alaska Southeast, established the family services
training academy to improve training programs.
COMMISSIONER PERDUE said the multi-disciplinary teams established
in HB 375 should improve teamwork which was previously discussed.
Also, workers have better and faster access to criminal records and
family abuse histories.
Number 1844
COMMISSIONER PERDUE stated the division had requested that the
Kempe Children's Center include an attorney in the review of the
five cases previously mentioned. The attorney heading up the
American Bar Association's Children Section found that "Alaska
statutes are more narrowly drawn in certain respects than those of
almost any other state." Additionally, his findings concluded
that in order for child abuse to have occurred in this state, a
child would have to have suffered substantial physical harm or
imminent and substantial risk that the child will suffer harm.
Number 1890
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Susan Wibker from the Department of Law to
provide her overview at this time.
Number 1903
SUSAN G. WIBKER, Assistant Attorney General, Human Services
Section, Civil Division, Department of Law, said she was
temporarily assigned to work with Commissioner Perdue on child
custody issues. She stated her remarks will focus on the Division
of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) portion of the bill and Dean
Guaneli from the criminal division was available to answer
questions pertaining to the criminal portion of HB 375. She said
Sec. 47.05.090 on page 21 authorizes the state to join the
Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical Assistance. The
statutory authorization being requested is to allow the state of
Alaska to join thirty-seven other states who have become part of a
compact to accept each state's medical eligibility determinations
on hard to adopt children. This is part of the overall thrust of
HB 375 to achieve faster, safe, permanent placements for children.
She explained that currently if a special needs child from Alaska
is adopted to a family in another state, or if a special needs
child is adopted in Alaska and the adoptive family moves to another
state, the Medicaid eligibility for that child ends in Alaska and
reapplication has to be made through the other state. This compact
allows states to honor the Medicaid eligibility of the other
states.
Number 1993
MS. WIBKER pointed out this results in a negative fiscal note
because currently Alaska is accepting the Medicaid eligibility
determination of special needs children from other states who are
being adopted by Alaskans. There are currently 256 Alaskan
children adopted into other states who are in out-of-state homes.
If HB 375 passes, Alaska would stop subsidizing those adoptions and
the state where the child resides would pick up the Medicaid
eligibility. In short, Alaska is paying for the kids coming in,
but if Alaska joins this compact, other states will pay for Alaskan
kids going out of state.
Number 2034
MS. WIBKER referred to Sec. 47.10.010, and said it's a statement
about jurisdiction and the actual change in what defines a child in
need of aid comes in 47.10.011. She had heard the myth that the
state is trying to double the number of children taken into state
custody in that there were previously 6 grounds to take state
custody and under HB 375, there are 12. She argued the state is
not trying to double the number of children in state custody, but
rather attempting to more precisely define the situations where the
state should be involved in the families' lives. She pointed out
there are about four different factual situations under the
definition of abandonment in existing statute AS 47.10.010. A
series of recent Supreme Court opinions have strongly advised the
law be amended because the abandonment statute was not protecting
children. She said, "We were getting legal results that were
contrary to legislative intent." She pointed out the first four
grounds for jurisdiction - abandonment, incarceration, a child that
has been left with someone and not picked up, and children who are
habitually absent from home or refuse to go home - were all lumped
together under old law.
Number 2092
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that parents frequently express frustration
about runaways in their early teens but it was his understanding
that under HB 375, the child could be considered a child in need of
aid and the parents would have an opportunity to use legal
authorities to keep the child from running.
MS. WIBKER explained there is one entire statute that deals with
runaways. House Bill 375 more narrowly defines the situations
where the state would take legal custody of a child. She noted
there are runaways who run away for good reason and there are
runaways who run away for no good reason and explained, "what we
did in defining under number 4, the runaways - it's legitimate for
the state to step in and take custody as a child in need of aid -
we restricted the definition to those cases where the runaway
conduct is actually threatening the child's physical or emotion
health."
Number 2135
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if a parent feels that the young child by
running away is threatening his/her physical and mental health, can
the parent issue the complaint that the child is in need of aid.
MS. WIBKER responded yes, the parent could call the Division of
Family and Youth Services and make a report of harm. She added
that a parent can request the state to take custody of their child.
MS. WIBKER continued that jurisdictional ground 5 is in existing
statute, and is what's called medical neglect. For example, a
child with a diagnosed medical condition and the parents are
refusing to get treatment. There are some exceptions that would
not allow the state to intervene, but this deals with a knowing
failure to provide needed medical treatment to a child. It also
provides for a knowing failure to provide treatment for an
emotional condition in a child. She said that jurisdictional
ground 6 goes directly to address the recommendations from the
Kempe Center. She explained that under existing law, a child has
to suffer substantial physical harm before the state could
intervene or there had to be an imminent and substantial risk that
the child would suffer harm. Commissioner Perdue had pointed out
the problems associated with the harm having to be identifiable and
immediate. To address the Kempe Center concern, HB 375 allows
earlier intervention by the state.
Number 2247
MS. WIBKER noted that jurisdictional ground 7 is sexual abuse and
the language pretty much parallels the language for physical abuse,
a child has suffered sexual abuse, or there is a substantial risk
that the child will suffer sexual abuse. She pointed out that a
number of the sexual abuse cases that end up in the state's custody
are because one parent or one caretaker is the offender and the
other parent or caretaker is nonsupportive of the child or is
willing to allow the child to stay with the offender or visit the
offender. The risks defined under jurisdiction can also be found
in the criminal portion under the endangering of a child statute,
so the poor supervision that puts a child at risk could also result
in a criminal offense.
Number 2287
MS. WIBKER said, "Jurisdictional ground 8 is emotional harm. These
are the cases where it's not -- they may come into the system as
emotional neglect where you have a parent not getting care for a
child that's maybe hostile, aggressive or suicidal and what happens
is the child gets the treatment they need and you find out that
this child's condition is not going to change or get better unless
something changes at home. The conclusion is that things are going
on in the home that are creating this condition and all of the
treatment in the world cannot fix the problem." Typically, these
reports of harm come from places like Charter North Hospital where
a child is being treated for setting fires, choking other children,
et cetera, and the parents have dropped the child off and haven't
been back. She said that under existing law, not a whole lot can
be done about these children unless it qualifies as medical
neglect. Under the proposed changes, the state would be able to do
something, not only to make sure the child got the treatment but to
do something so the parents participated and were actually were
able to do something to adjust whatever ...
TAPE 98-20, SIDE B
Number 0001
MS. WIBKER .... that's contributing to the problem. Jurisdictional
ground 9 is physical neglect, which is in existing statute, but is
worded differently under HB 375. Jurisdictional ground 10 is the
substance abuse. She said these children come into the state's
custody very early in life and the usual report of harm is neglect.
For example, the child is not coming to school, hunger,
unsupervised, dirty, et cetera, and normally an investigation
reveals the real problem is that parents are abusing substances.
There is no reference to the problem of substance abuse under
existing law and investigations have revealed that substance abuse
exists in over 80 percent of the families of children in state
custody. Under existing law, the only thing that could be done in
a home where drugs or alcohol was being abused was to prove
imminent and substantial risk of harm, which often means waiting
until something bad happens. Thus, a provision was written in
HB 375 that the ability to parent has been substantially impaired
by the addictive or habitual use of intoxicants or controlled
substances, including inhalants.
Number 0064
MS. WIBKER said jurisdictional ground 11 deals with parents who are
mentally ill. Often, these are cases where the parent is very
willing and loving, but just not able to care for the children and
a case worker will take custody of a child to make sure the parent
gets the needed treatment and stays on prescribed medication. Many
of these families require supervision to ensure the parent is doing
what's needed to care for the child.
Number 0088
MS. WIBKER said that jurisdictional ground 12 is not a change from
existing law, which is the situation where parents are actually
encouraging a child to commit delinquent acts. These children
often come into the system with charges of delinquency or as
children in need of aid.
Number 0105
MS. WIBKER said some of the jurisdictional grounds actually narrow
where the state can take custody, and the purpose of all of them is
to try to reflect what's happening on the front line in the lives
of social workers. The goal was to get away from vague statements,
such as imminent and substantial risk, and draft the legislation to
reflect what's being encountered every day.
Number 0127
MS. WIBKER referred to Sec. 47.10.013, and said abandonment has
been drafted with a more common sense definition. Under existing
statute if there is a relative willing to care for the child, the
child is not legally abandoned. She explained there were
situations where one parent would move away and leave the child,
but if an alcoholic relative was willing to care for the child, the
child was not considered abandoned and parental rights couldn't be
terminated so the child could be adopted in a permanent home.
There was factual abandonment, but not legal abandonment. House
Bill 375 separates that definition and makes it a more common
sense definition. It requires a track record and abandonment of
younger children is treated more seriously than older children.
Federal law requires a faster system for getting permanent homes
for abandoned children so the proposed legislation was drafted to
allow a shorter time period for declaring abandonment for children
under six years of age who have a critical need to attach and bond.
Number 0177
MS. WIBKER directed the committee's attention to the change in
wording from "minor" to "child" which is part of the separation of
the code to distinguish the difference between children in need of
aid and children in the juvenile delinquency system.
Number 0210
MS. WIBKER said HB 375 proposes faster time lines, which is a
federal and national trend, so that children are not languishing in
out of home care forever. For example, a deadline for an
adjudication hearing, which is the trial on the petition filed by
the state, has been established. House Bill 375 proposes to adopt
a federal law for child in need of aid proceedings to allow foster
parents and people caring for children to receive notice of
hearings and to attend the hearings. It basically requires a
loosening of confidentially and allows the people caring for the
children to address the judge at every hearing. In her opinion,
that should result in better judicial rulings about what children
need. Additionally, the time line for appeals after the
termination of parental rights are being tightened up. "She
stated, as Russ Webb mentioned earlier, if you were to file a
termination petition right now in Anchorage, you'd get a trial date
in about January or February of 1999. Sometimes when we finish the
time, we wait nine months to a year for a ruling and then we wait
up to a year for an appeal decision." The time lines and fast
tracking to safe, permanent homes is required under federal law.
She referred to page 29, line 11, and said that every case where a
child is in out-of-home care has to have a permanency hearing 12
months after the child is removed. At the permanency hearing, a
judge will consider what the parents have done in the last year and
make a decision as to whether the state should continue trying to
reunite the child with the parents or if the state should look for
a permanent, safe home for the child. This will solve the problem
arising from the situation where a parent enters treatment on the
eve of the hearing, throwing off the plan to terminate parental
rights. She stated there are cases where this pattern has been
established and the cases have been open anywhere from five to ten
years. These are changes that have been made in the federal
Adoption and Safe Families Act, passed into law November 1997.
Number 0436
MS. WIBKER commented that HB 375 is proposing a couple of other
changes that would drastically change the way social workers
practice currently. One is the requirement that the department
make reasonable efforts to reunite every child with their family.
Changes in federal law have recognized that some cases are so
aggravated and the level of violence is so high in some families
that the department no longer has to make plans to reunite every
child in the home. She explained those are cases where there's
been a homicide of a child, a felony assault on a child, sexual
abuse, torture, some type of chronic abuse, et cetera. The change
will result in the state focusing its resources on immediately
finding a permanent placement for the child. She said, "So it
saves resources in the cases where the level of family violence has
escalated so high that the resources are too little, too late to
make a difference. It allows the state to put its treatment
resources into the families where we can get in early and work to
rehabilitate those families."
Number 0497
MS. WIBKER said another change is in the filing of termination of
parental rights petitions. Currently, the filing of a termination
of parental rights petition is totally at the discretion of the
department and its attorneys. As she mentioned previously, there
are situations where the parents can use drugs for years and by
entering treatment on the eve of a hearing, they keep the
department from ever getting the child into a safe, permanent home.
Under existing law, the department has to prove by clear and
convincing evidence to a court that parental conduct which brought
the child into state custody was likely to continue. Under the
proposed changes, petitions to terminate parental rights would be
mandatory in some cases. So if a parent uses drugs for two or
three years and goes into treatment a month before the termination
trial, a judge can rule that it's not in the best interest of the
child to take another chance and wait.
Number 0559
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the committee would now hear testimony via
teleconference. He asked Walter Gauthier to present his comments.
Number 0563
WALTER GAUTHIER testified via teleconference from Homer. He
requested a copy of the audits and internal reviews conducted by
the division. He said that page 23 indicates that exposure to
domestic violence is prima facie evidence of emotional harm to the
child. He expressed concern that with the prima facie evidence
language, children will go into state custody as a child in need of
aid case automatically. He said there will be situations where a
woman calls police after being beaten, police take the husband
away, and the social workers take the children away. This woman
will have to go to court and prove "something to someone" in order
to get her children back for the crime of allowing them to witness
domestic violence. In his opinion, HB 375 was 49 pages of
destruction of parental rights. He said, "For the legislature to
blame parental rights for the problems within the child protection
system is no different from blaming a legal gun owner for crimes
committed by people with guns."
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Gauthier for his testimony and asked
Eugene Altig to testify.
Number 0684
EUGENE ALTIG testified from Fairbanks via teleconference regarding
the harm done to children when the family is broken up. He
believed that leaders of social service workers should be elected
so they could be held accountable by the public. He noted that Ms.
Wibker's comments sounded rational, but because of the ambiguity,
many different things could be read into the legislation. He said
it's all a matter of interpretation and the language needs to be
kept simple and more direct.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Altig for his testimony and called on
Suzette Graham to present her comments.
Number 0762
SUZETTE GRAHAM testified from Kenai via teleconference. As a
foster parent, she said there were certain provisions of HB 375
that she supported such as quicker termination of parental rights
if a parent refuses to make a reasonable effort. She believed that
"reasonable effort" should be defined, so if there's a six month
case plan for example, the parent can't attempt to do something
after five months and have it be considered a reasonable effort.
She's had two children in foster care for two and one-half years
and it's still at the reasonable effort stage. She suggested that
a good way to save money would be for the state to quit paying for
repeated treatment for those parents going into rehab three and
four times. She would like to see "the best interest of the child"
added to this legislation because everything that goes before a
court should be in the best interest of the child, whether it be to
reunite the child with parents, placement in another family or left
in a foster home. She said the willing to parent provision should
be eliminated because it doesn't address the psychological,
emotional or financial ability to parent. Personally, she thought
the family court concept, similar to what Sitka has in place,
should be explored. In conclusion, she said there were provisions
of the proposed legislation she liked and others she didn't, but
she encouraged the legislature to take action this session because
there were many children needing help.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Blair McCune to present his comments.
Number 0898
BLAIR MCCUNE, Deputy Director, Public Defender Agency, Department
of Administration, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He
confirmed the committee had received his written statement that had
been faxed earlier and said he would be reiterating much of the
testimony he had given on SB 218. He referred to AS 47.10.011 and
said, "This is where the age old problem of the power of the
government to intervene in a family's life to protect children
versus the family's right to raise their kids on their own. This
is the part of the statute that decides that basic policy question.
And what I'm concerned about is the - there are situations covered
by this bill -- and it's interesting, it says, 'the court may find
a child to be a child in need of aid' -- I don't know if that has
(indisc.) -- it seems to me like under the current legislation, the
child is or is not a child in need of aid based on the sections of
the statute. But I'd like to have the court look at abandonment
pretty carefully because under current law abandonment is
abandonment by both parents, the surviving parent or one parent if
the other parent's rights have been terminated. What this would do
actually is as a single parent, if a father abandons a mother who
has custody of the child, the state theoretically may take custody
of this child and there's thousands and thousands of cases -- not
to say that the department would step in in those situations, but
I think we ought to have a law that limits when the department
might step in and when they might not. And I think that same
problem exists in several other sections. Like the substance abuse
section, if one parent has a problem with substance abuse and the
other parent doesn't, theoretically the state could come in and
take custody of the child just based on one parent's problem. I
think what this does is, it doesn't recognize that families in
Alaska have a lot of resiliency where one parent stumbles, the
other parent picks up, where both parents stumble, often a
grandmother or grandfather or stepdad take care of the situation.
I think that perhaps the statute ought to be relooked at."
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. McCune for his testimony and asked
Michael Coons to testify at this time.
Number 1049
MICHAEL COONS, Paramedic, testified from Mat-Su that he was worked
in emergency services since 1981. He said the bottom line in
reading the proposed legislation is, he hasn't seen any real change
pertaining to the Division of Family and Youth Services --
meaningful punishment for those who neglect, abuse or exploit
children nor increased law enforcement role over that of the
division. Since moving to Alaska, he's not had any contact with
the DFYS; however, he has concluded that social service agencies
from state to state are very similar. He said what's needed is the
ability for law enforcement to make the decision on site to start
an investigation at least, or to remove the child. He shared
experiences he had encountered as a paramedic where child neglect
and possible sexual abuse were involved and the negative
interactions with case workers when reporting these incidents.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Coons for his testimony and asked Diana
Buffington of Kodiak to present her comments.
Number 1152
DIANA BUFFINGTON, President and State Coordinator, Children's
Rights Council of Alaska (CRCA) and Chairman, Alaska Task Force on
Family Law Reform, testified from Kodiak, stating that CRCA and the
task force advocate the equity and equality of both parents in
furtherance of a genuine focus on the needs and rights of children
and in recognition of the fundamental truth, issues that adversely
affect the parents' ability to raise a child and nurture their
children adversely affect children. The CRCA and the task force
promote the right of children to receive the same access to both
parents (indisc.) and sanction in the traditional family with
married parents. Society needs to recognize that a family
intervention, transition through separation or (indisc.) without
marriage is still family and that family values often cannot
survive when broken families disintegrate from the loss of a parent
and the perpetuation of parental irresponsibility through neglect
and abuse. She said there are serious breakdowns in the justice
system that have already affected many Alaskan families'
intervention in their children for decades. In 1990 and 1991, the
Alaska Senate task force held statewide public hearings to
determine areas of concern at DFYS, CSED, the custody
investigator's office and the guardian ad litem program in the
court. Seven years later, none of the recommendations of that task
force have been implemented in any of the family law referral
agencies. In fact, the agencies have continued to adopt
administrative regulations that are loosely based on federal
legislation. She concluded that the Children's Rights Council of
Alaska and the Alaska Task Force on Family Law Reform cannot
support HB 375 in its present form.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Buffington for her testimony and asked
Harry Niehaus to testify.
Number 1409
HARRY NIEHAUS testified from Fairbanks via teleconference in
opposition to HB 375. He said HB 375 gives broad statutory
authority to social workers and that families are being intimidated
by social workers. Also, he believes the language in HB 375 is
much too vague.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Cindy Houser to give her testimony.
Number 1461
CINDY HOUSER, Foster parent, testified via teleconference from
Kenai, in opposition to HB 375 because it works against foster
families and it doesn't help the children. While she agrees there
are some good things in HB 375, she is of the opinion, it creates
more loopholes and there's more wrong than good. She agreed that
in some cases parental rights should be terminated faster, but
social workers and judges need to be held more accountable for
sending children back to questionable situations in the home. She
said, "Us, as foster parents ought to have the same immunity as the
division because we're with these kids -- we shouldn't be held
responsible for their actions to our neighbors and people of the
community -- the state has custody of these kids, not us foster
parents, so we ought to have some protection, too." While much is
said about bad foster parents, she believed that most foster
parents are good. She suggested there should be mandatory drug
testing for all state workers working with children, as well as
foster parents.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Johnny Grames to present his testimony.
Number 1585
JOHNNY GRAMES, Representative, DADS-Alaska, testified from
Anchorage that he had been waiting all afternoon to testify. He
said fathers pay to raise their children and other people are
getting paid to come to teleconferences and to look after the best
interest of the child and to protect the children. The concern of
DADS-Alaska is who protects the children from the government and
the Administration. He noted the Bill of Rights was written to
protect the citizens from abuses of government power. He concluded
that legislation like HB 375 creates more problems than it solves
and fathers in DADS-Alaska want to help raise their children.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Marci Schmidt to present comments at this
time.
Number 1820
MARCI SCHMIDT, Representative, Parents United for Custodial
Justice, testified from Mat-Su, representing Parents United for
Custodial Justice and the national organization that helped to
advocate for the passage of Public Law 105-89. She said HB 375 is
very ineffective and would do more damage to children and to
children's rights. She suggested the committee shelve HB 375. She
stated there needs to be more accountability in all departments of
government. She urged the committee not to pass HB 375.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Schmidt for her testimony and asked
Scott Calder to present his testimony.
Number 1891
SCOTT CALDER testified via teleconference from Fairbanks and
requested copies of reports, audits and documents referred to
during this meeting. He concurred with the comments of Mr.
Gauthier and several other individuals who had testified that
HB 375 gives too much power to government. He said clearly, the
priority must be to protect people from this agency and not to
protect the agency from claims of liability, et cetera. There
needs to be more accountability from the system. He stated the
issue of whether a child refuses to go home being equated with
abandonment is reprehensible. He said, "The department is already
having problems responding to parents who contact the department.
Earlier it was said that a parent could make a report of harm to
the department but then immediately the implication was floated
right by that that would necessarily mean the parent was requesting
the state to take custody. Often times the parent needs some other
person in the community to support them when they're having
difficulty with a discipline problem or something with a children."
Number 2143
CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted that additional public hearings would be held
on HB 375. He felt it was appropriate to have a discussion of the
proposed legislation so individuals wishing to testify could do so
intelligently. He called on Bradley Laybourn to testify next.
Number 2172
BRADLEY LAYBOURN testified from Anchorage that until recently, he'd
had no contact with social service agencies and he is appalled at
the amount of power the agencies have and the lack of
accountability. His permanent fund and income tax refunds have
been garnisheed and his child has been living with him for over a
year. Several times he's attempted to contact the agency, only to
be put on hold for up to four hours. He testified in opposition to
giving agencies additional powers.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE pointed out that HB 375 is about child abuse, not
child support.
TAPE 98-21, SIDE A
Number 0001
CAROL PALMER, Representative, Parents United for Custodial Justice,
testified via teleconference from Mat-Su, said, "... about child
support, is in here under Section 11, starting on page 9, and what
I'm concerned about is the criminal nonsupport in the first degree,
that's also in here on the bottom on 9, and on page 10, it's
criminal nonsupport in the second degree." She didn't think this
needed to be included in HB 375. She referred to the statement at
the top of page 10,"the person knowingly conveys assets, property,
or any thing of value to another person in order to avoid payment
of child support ...." and said there's a lot of misunderstanding.
She discussed the problems a noncustodial parent on low income has
making a living, so that person may need to take steps to protect
their own interest to survive by signing over a car or property to
another person. Also, she expressed concerns about the vagueness
of the language regarding abandonment of a child.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Palmer and asked Dr. Bergeson to present
his comments.
Number 0189
MARVIN BERGESON, M.D., Tanana Valley Clinic, testified via
teleconference from Fairbanks in support of HB 375. He's concerned
with children who have been abandoned by their parents, especially
where there's substance and alcohol abuse involved, and the
children are being mandated by the courts to be reunited with
parents who have repeatedly failed in rehab.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Dr. Bergeson for his testimony and asked
Gary Maxwell to present his testimony.
Number 0262
GARY MAXWELL testified via teleconference from Anchorage, and
questioned why allegations of child abuse were not investigated by
police rather than by social workers. Social workers should become
involved after police have determined that abuse exists and could
make placements as soon as possible. With regard to the prevention
of fetal alcohol syndrome and crack addicted babies, he suggested
mandatory drug testing for all welfare recipients. He's seen too
many cases of drug and alcohol abuse in welfare homes. Just
recently, he tried to help a grandmother from Oregon get her
grandchildren because the mother had been high on cocaine for three
or four days, but the judge threw it out of court because the
grandmother had no standing. He urged the committee not to grant
the Child Support Enforcement Division any additional powers with
the proposed criminal nonsupport provision.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Maxwell for his testimony and asked
Suzanne Goodrich to testify.
Number 0414
SUZANNE GOODRICH testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
is an adoptive parent with two children and she was testifying on
behalf of Catholic Social Services. She said, "I hope to leave you
with some good news. After talking about child protection and all
of the issues covered today, there's a very exciting adoption
initiative that has just really taken off. It's a collaborative
effort between Catholic Social Services, Fairbanks Counseling and
Adoption, and Catholic Community Services in Juneau, and working
with the Indian Child Welfare Act children, the Bristol Bay Native
Health Corporation in a consortium with ten tribal organizations."
She said the group is finding new ways to work creatively together
to create a new system for adoption in the state, a draft agreement
has been established for a toll free telephone line. A letter to
the editor asking for interested parents has resulted in 37
families making inquiry. She said the group has a draft
recruitment campaign ready to go pending approval for adoptive and
foster parents in addition to working on a training program for
adoptive parents.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Goodrich for her testimony and asked
Martha Hodson for her comments.
Number 0596
MARTHA HODSON testified via teleconference from the Kenai
Legislative Information Office, stating that parts of House Bill
375 are okay, but there's a lot wrong with it as well. She said
there is not always reasonable effort in every case. It's a crime
to neglect or abuse a child, and the police officers need to be
involved in investigating these crimes and stop expecting social
workers to be police officers. It is important to remember that
not every case is abuse; parents need to be able to discipline.
Number 0699
CHAIRMAN BUNDE concluded public testimony and announced that HB 375
would be heard in committee again at a later date.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0707
CHAIRMAN BUNDE adjourned the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee at 5:17 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|