HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE April 15, 1999 3:08 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Representative Fred Dyson, Co-Chair Representative John Coghill, Co-Chair Representative Jim Whitaker Representative Joe Green Representative Carl Morgan Representative Tom Brice Representative Allen Kemplen MEMBERS ABSENT All members present COMMITTEE CALENDAR * HOUSE BILL NO. 177 "An Act relating to foster parents; relating to the right of foster parents to have notice of, and testify at, delinquency hearings and to the disclosure of minors' records to foster parents; and amending Rules 3, 7, 10, 12, 21, 23, and 25, Alaska Delinquency Rules." - MOVED CSHB 177(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE * HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 36 Relating to rejecting the conclusions in a recent article published by the American Psychological Association that suggests that sexual relationships between adults and children might be positive for children; and urging the President of the United States and the United States Congress to similarly reject these conclusions. - MOVED CSHJR 36(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE HOUSE BILL NO. 70 "An Act relating to questionnaires or surveys administered in public schools." - MOVED CSHB 70(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE (* First public hearing) PREVIOUS ACTION BILL: HB 177 SHORT TITLE: FOSTER CARE & DELINQUENT MINORS SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action 4/07/99 670 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 4/07/99 670 (H) HES, JUD 4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106 BILL: HJR 36 SHORT TITLE: AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION REPORT SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON, Ogan Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action 4/07/99 670 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 4/07/99 670 (H) HES 4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106 BILL: HB 70 SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC SCHOOL SURVEYS SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVES(S) DYSON Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action 1/25/99 81 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S) 1/25/99 81 (H) HES 4/06/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106 4/06/99 (H) HEARD AND HELD 4/06/99 (H) MINUTE(HES) 4/06/99 (H) MINUTE(HES) 4/15/99 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106 WITNESS REGISTER LISA TORKELSON, Legislative Assistant to Representative Fred Dyson Alaska State Legislature Capitol Building, Room 104 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-6881 POSITION STATEMENT: Presented sponsor statement for HB 177. ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer Youth Corrections Division of Family and Youth Services Department of Health and Social Services P.O. Box 110630 Juneau, Alaska 99811 Telephone: (907) 465-3228 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 177. RHEA FARBERMAN, Associate Executive Director Public Communications Office American Psychological Association 750 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (202) 336-5700 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 36. DEBRA GERRISH 9202 Emily Way Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 789-3236 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HJR 36. MARY ROZENZWEIG, Executive Director Substance Abuse Directors Association 4111 Minnesota Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Telephone: (907) 770-2927 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. ANDREE McLEOD 3721 Young Street Anchorage, Alaska 99508 Telephone: (907) 561-8595 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. DEE HUBBARD 4251 Pinnacle Circle Anchorage, Alaska 99504 Telephone: (907) 337-6370 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. DIANE ETTER 1550 Crescent Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99508 Telephone: (907) 562-4822 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. BETH SHOBER, Health Specialist Teaching and Learning Support Department of Education 801 West 10th Street, Suite 200 Juneau, Alaska 99801 Telephone: (907) 465-2887 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. DOUGLAS GARDNER, Assistant Attorney General Oil, Gas and Mining Section Civil Division (Juneau) Department of Law P.O. Box 110300 Juneau, Alaska 99811 Telephone: (907) 465-3600 POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 70. ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 99-37, SIDE A Number 0001 CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL called the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:08 p.m. Members present at the call to order were Representatives Dyson, Coghill, Brice and Kemplen. Representative Morgan joined the meeting at 3:15 p.m., and Representatives Whitaker and Green joined the meeting at 3:41 p.m. HB 177 - FOSTER CARE & DELINQUENT MINORS Number 0094 CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the first order of business as House Bill No. 177, "An Act relating to foster parents; relating to the right of foster parents to have notice of, and testify at, delinquency hearings and to the disclosure of minors' records to foster parents; and amending Rules 3, 7, 10, 12, 21, 23, and 25, Alaska Delinquency Rules." Number 0128 LISA TORKELSON, Legislative Assistant to Representative Fred Dyson, presented the sponsor statement for HB 177. Last year they introduced HB 456 which gave foster parents the right to have notice of and testify at child-in-need-of-aid (CINA) and delinquency hearings and to have information disclosed to them about their particular foster child. They were able to put the half that dealt with CINA cases into the governor's child protection bill last year and it passed. Because it was a 64-page bill it was limited to CINA, and the delinquency half didn't get put in. This bill brings it up to speed with the CINA half. She offered a committee substitute which clarifies that the department, rather than the court, would give notice of the hearing, and a foster parent would have information relevant to the foster child; not necessarily all information. Number 0284 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 177, version 1-LSO760\D, Luckhaupt, 4/13/99, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version D was before the committee. Number 0368 ROBERT BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer, Youth Corrections, Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS), Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), came forward to testify in support of HB 177. The provisions contained in the proposed committee substitute are appropriate in that they are now in effect in the child-in-need-of-aid proceedings. It is proper public policy that they bring parity to the foster parent privileges and rights in the delinquency statute. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 177, version 1-LSO760\D, Luckhaupt, 4/13/99, from committee with individual recommendations and the attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 177(HES) moved from the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee. HJR 36 - AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION REPORT Number 0473 CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the next order of business as House Joint Resolution No. 36, Relating to rejecting the conclusions in a recent article published by the American Psychological Association that suggests that sexual relationships between adults and children might be positive for children; and urging the President of the United States and the United States Congress to similarly reject these conclusions. Number 0503 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON, sponsor, commented that it is sad that they even have to deal with this issue. The American Psychological Association has published many scholarly papers over the years on subjects dealing with human behavior. By their admission, they have published 40 or 50 that detail and document the negative affects of child sexual abuse. Last year they published a paper, "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples" that was interesting and in startling contrast to the results and conclusions of other investigators. It was a literature search of self-reporting college students. In their conclusion, they suggested that child sexual abuse may not necessarily be as harmful as assumed before. They suggested that people dealing in this field, including policymakers, may want to adopt less-pejorative terms in describing the activity. They even suggested that some or many of the people interviewed had a positive result from their sexual contact with older people. Alaska has taken a strong position that adult sexual contact with children is a felony. Last year's bill made it clearer that the persistence of that activity is a major factor in authorizing the DFYS to remove children from their home, and if it continues, parental rights can be terminated. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON is concerned that unchallenged, this information will go on to be used to intimidate or influence those with a strong stand on protecting children from being sexually exploited. He was careful not to question their findings; he questioned their methodology, but agreed their findings were logical given their methodology. In their packets is information from another researcher who highlighted some of the problems in the methodology. He believes it is an unwarranted leap to go from generalizing about a self-reporting, young college group to the general population. He believes that many of the dysfunctions from child sexual abuse don't show up until later on in life, often in a marriage or close relationship. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON added that since this article was published, the APA has been particularly active in saying that they never endorsed the conclusions of this article. Most of the other articles that they have published in the field have shown that child sexual abuse is harmful. The APA was the vehicle of publishing it; they believe it is helpful information to be added to the body of knowledge and he doesn't quarrel with that. There are a couple of nationally active groups who encourage adult-child relationships who claim this as a great backup for their perspective; that it is good for adults to be involved with children sexually. Number 0906 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE wanted to be sure they were not talking about someone 18 years old dating someone 16 or 17 and asked for a clearer definition of age ranges. Number 0944 LISA TORKELSON replied that on page 46 of the study in their packets, it distinguishes between "adult-adolescent sex" and "adult-child sex," but she doesn't know where this study makes the age distinctions. Number 1114 RHEA FARBERMAN, Associate Executive Director, Public Communications Office, American Psychological Association, testified via teleconference from Puerto Rico. She thanked the committee for the opportunity to clarify the APA's position on child sexual abuse. The APA agrees with the resolution. She read from a prepared statement: The American Psychological Association (APA), through its members, sponsored initiatives and publishing, has a long record in the area of the prevention and treatment of child abuse and neglect including sexual abuse. In the national legislative arena, APA has played an active role in advocating for programs expanding child abuse prevention, treatment and research. And, through its Coordinating Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, APA has been a leader in helping the mental health profession document and treat the ill effects of child abuse. In 1990, the APA council of Representatives, which is our governing body, passed a resolution calling for a national strategy to prevent and treat child abuse and neglect and called such action a matter of the highest urgency. APA's position is, therefore, very clear I think: The sexual abuse of children in wrong and harmful to children and the families. As a publisher of psychological research, APA publishes thousands of research reports every year. But, publication of a finding of a research project within an APA journal is in no way an endorsement of that finding by the Association. MS. FARBERMAN stated anyone who suggests that APA is anything but vehemently opposed to child sexual abuse is either ignorant of the work that the Association and its members have done in the area, or is not with the majority of the psychological research on the issue, or is attempting to distort APA's position. The APA applauds the committee's call for further research into the affects of child sexual abuse and for treatment for families and children to recover from it. She went on to read: No responsible mental health organization, including the American Psychological Association, endorses pedophilia or denies its negative effect on children. Any statement that suggests otherwise is just a distortion. The American Psychiatric Association, which publishes the DSM-IV [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition] writes: "An adult who engages in sexual activity with a child is performing a criminal and immoral act which never can be considered normal or socially acceptable behavior." This statement is fully consistent with the policies of the American Psychological Association and with the views of mental health professionals all over the world. MS. FARBERMAN suggested they add language to the proposed resolution which adopts some of the language the APA has put out in their statement which clarifies APA's position. They think it is important for the public to know that the mental health community says loud and clear that pedophilia is wrong and that child sexual abuse is harmful. Number 1297 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Farberman if the APA regularly has a disclaimer in their publications. MS. FARBERMAN explained that a disclaimer appears on the inside front cover of the journal, and it states that APA in no way endorses the research findings of any particular study. Number 1327 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the papers APA receives are subjected to peer review in the selection process for publication. MS. FARBERMAN answered yes, all of their articles go through a peer review process before they are published. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked at what age does childhood end. MS. FARBERMAN answered that one of the complications depends on what study is looked at in interpreting the literature. The legal definition is 18. Different studies have looked at different developmental phases. One of the research questions that the authors may have wanted to look at is, "is sexual abuse more harmful to younger children than older children." That might be a legitimate research question. Regardless of the answer to that question, it is still wrong and is still harmful to children. REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN commented that childcare is usually provided through sixth grade, and he asked for clarification on the gray area between childhood and adulthood when children become youths. He asked if Ms. Farberman if she had any sources so he could better understand that. Number 1356 MS. FARBERMAN offered to look into it for him. She guessed there are some studies that broke down age groups and looked at young children, children, teenagers and older teenagers. One of the questions researchers wanted to look at was the degree of harm based on age group and developmental maturity. She believes the bottom line is that the great majority of literature shows that harm is done to children no matter whether they are six or 16. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked for a definition of "meta-analytic." MS. FARBERMAN replied it means a study of studies. The researchers in this case looked at a number of studies and pooled all the data from all the studies and looked at them as one large data set. Number 1532 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON assured her that the resolution does not infer that the APA endorsed the suggestions and conclusions in this article. They will entertain her suggested amendment. Number 1567 DEBRA GERRISH came forward to testify on behalf of herself. She is a survivor of child abuse, and she shared her experience of being sexually abused as a child. She had blocked those experiences out of her mind because they were so painful. She agreed that a child is a child until he/she is 18. The child's mind works like a child and doesn't know how to make those choices, so there could be a child willing to go along with the sexual abuse to hold a family together. She explained she was a willing child because she thought it would hold her family together. She has had to deal with depression and post-traumatic stress from her relationship with both of her parents. She encouraged the committee to pass this resolution. Any child who is out there being sexually abused is going to be affected. MS. GERRISH believes that childcare isn't provided after age 12 is because society says "We can't afford childcare after 12." Most of the children who get in trouble get in trouble between the time school ends and parents get home. "If we were a society that truly cared about children, we would have some kind of childcare, some programs in place, to help those kids to keep them out of trouble." MS. GERRISH requested that the surgeon general be added to list of people who will receive a copy of the resolution. Number 1705 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON noted that is a good idea. He also suggested that Ms. Gerrish could also represent scores other victims and survivors of sexual abuse who don't speak up and report it. Number 1756 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 1 which added on line 22 ", Surgeon General of the United States,". CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There being none, Amendment 1 was adopted. The committee took an at-ease from 3:40 p.m. to 3:44 p.m. Number 1808 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 2 which will be on page 2, between line 5 and 6, which adds an additional whereas. It reads: WHEREAS virtually all studies in this area, including those published by the American Psychological Association, condemn child sexual abuse as criminal and harmful to children; and CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There being none, Amendment 2 was adopted. Number 1957 REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER made a motion to move the proposed CSHJR 36 from the committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHJR 36(HES) moved from the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON informed the committee that this study was brought to their attention by Representative Ogan's office, and they have been supportive of this. The committee took an at-ease from 3:48 p.m. to 3:49 p.m. HB 70 - PUBLIC SCHOOL SURVEYS Number 1996 CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL announced the next order of business as House Bill No. 70, "An Act relating to questionnaires or surveys administered in public schools." Number 2029 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained that HB 98 amended the code to create ASA 14.03.110 in 1979. At that time, Av Gross, the Attorney General, interpreted that bill to say: "The use of broadly based anonymous surveys of school-aged children to determine the frequency of alcohol, drugs and child abuse tools used in the efficiency of a government programs would be precluded by the bill." When the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) was done last year, there was some consternation in some places in the state. It asked the question if parents needed to be in the loop and did their permission for their children to participate need to be active or passive. Passive permission means if the school doesn't hear from the parents, it is presumed to be okay. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON indicated that constituents asked that this legislation address and clarify the legal position. The first attempt was to insert the word "personal" so it would read "personal family matters" into the code, but the DHSS said that would make it too tough to get the survey done. They worked together and came up with HB 70 which allows a one-time-per-year blanket parental approval for their children to participate in anonymous surveys. The parents would still be notified before the survey is given. The department will still say that it is too tough, and the logistics of it will preclude it happening, and some districts will opt out. They only need one-eighth of the student population in order for the survey to be valid. He contends that most school districts will be easily able to identify the children who have the annual blanket permission. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute for HB 70, version 1-LSO263\G, Ford, 4/6/99, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version G was before the committee. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON noted the DHSS has told him the raw data gathered is valuable. He agreed it is of some value to find the magnitude of the students' social problems, and there are funding streams available if the state has participated in gathering this data. He is not against the survey but wants the parents to be actively involved in the process. He noted that in Sitka, after they chose active parental permission, they now have groups of parents and students who meet to discuss and deal with some of the problems illuminated by the survey. TAPE 99-37, SIDE B Number 2181 MARY ROSENZWEIG, Executive Director, Substance Abuse Directors Association, testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She thanked the committee for understanding the importance of the YRBS. The YRBS is the only good standard they have to target prevention programs and to measure how well their programs are working. She noted that she didn't have a copy of the proposed CS in front of her but said the blanket permission really adds to no value except that it is administratively burdensome and introduces an element of bias to the study. No one really knows about the children whose parents checked the no box. They don't know if the parents were just in a bad mood that day or if they always say no when presented with this type of question. They wonder if the children who don't participate in the study are more or less likely to have risk behaviors. They just won't know about those children. MS. ROSENZWEIG offered their support for the second part of the amended version which makes parents more involved. Parent involvement is paramount to substance abuse prevention. If parents see this study presented to them, and they don't want their children to participate, even though the association would like to have that data, they believe the parents have the right to say no. They are in support of amending the bill to require that parents be given notice of the survey and that parents be given the opportunity to refuse to have their child participate. That will allow for parent involvement and continued data collection. Number 2065 ANDREE McLEOD testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a parent. She supports whatever bill they put forth that will ask parents to give written permission. She wants to know whenever her child is going to be asked questions that deals with his behavior or anything else; then she can teach him about privacy matters, who to divulge that information to, what kind of information to divulge; it is her responsibility, duty and right. She has a lot of information she would like to send to them, including a resolution that the Anchorage Assembly passed, a joint meeting of the Anchorage school board and assembly, where Bob Christal, Superintendent of the Anchorage School District, reported that the municipal Health Department and the state of Alaska are the primary beneficiaries of this survey [YRBS] and not the schools. He stressed that it is an issue that the district gets very little benefit from. He added that if the survey is done, it will be at the request of groups outside the district that need this information. This is nothing to do with education. It diminishes the study time of students. They already have to be assessed to get their diplomas. This only gets in the way. MS. McLEOD referred to a letter from Marjorie Speers, Ph. D., Deputy Associate Director for Science, Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, to Dr. John Middaugh in the state epidemiologist office. Dr. Speers states that the YRBS is not even research, it is just for the state to know the numbers. MS. McLEOD believes that the boundaries for privacy are being disregarded and violated. The law states simply that schools have to get written parental permission for field trips, school activities and immunizations. "All of a sudden, written permission is being scrutinized as to what it means. It's not scrutinized for a field trip. Kids stay in school if they don't have permission. They don't go to a school activity, they can't belong to one because written permission isn't there. But all of a sudden now it's okay not to have written permission. It'll be okay to say no. The right thing to do is to put in whatever bill to protect the rights of parents and families to privacy." Another way to get this information is through a key informant survey which is more reliable and cheaper. She said she also has paperwork that follows the money trail. The federal law states that the prior written consent of the parent is needed to protect pupil rights. She believes that the state has not been doing it right, and she urged the committee to get it right. Number 1872 DEE HUBBARD testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a parent. She told the committee that there are other surveys being done in schools that parents don't find out about until after the fact. She brought their attention to the letter in the packets from Marti Hughes which talked about what happened to her son's high school class last year. Parents don't know how many other surveys are out there, but they would like to know because they are paying for them. She agreed that there often is a problem in a student-teacher relationship where students won't say no if they are given a choice to participate in a survey. In Anchorage schools, if there is no parent permission the child will not go on a field trip. MS. HUBBARD had seen the YRBS after the fact in 1995 and asked the middle school principal if she would have let her child take this survey, and the principal said "Absolutely not." Ms. Hubbard's husband was furious when he saw the survey. He commented that it reminded him of when he attended the Bureau of Indian Affairs school and was subjected to pervasive surveys and questions where they had no choice but to answer them. MS. HUBBARD referred to the statement last week that they are missing the children they really want to survey. She wonders if the survey is targeting certain groups of children. She would like an answer to know how the targeting is being done. Finally, as a parent, she has not turned the right of educating her children over to the state. She is a taxpayer, a property owner and she wants to know what she is paying for. Irrespective of who is administering this survey, she is paying for it. She wants the right to be able to say yes or no. She would most likely say no to a blanket permission at the time of registration. Number 1686 DIANE ETTER testified via teleconference from Anchorage as a parent. She is in favor of any measure that gives parents active permission before any survey. She feels parents need control over some part of their children's lives. A survey is totally non-academic part of school. There should be no reason it would be imposed without active parental permission. In addition, she favors any measure that would cut down on unnecessary, non-academic activities taking up classroom instructional time. The erosion in classroom instructional time is a huge concern for her. Already there are in-service days, half days during parent-teacher conferences, shortened days for school assemblies, time taken in class to register for next year's classes and fill out teacher evaluations, time to take standardized tests, the upcoming benchmark exams and exit exams. She is concerned that they are losing instructional time in huge chunks, and she strongly objects to administering any survey in school that would further erode instructional time when it is something unrelated to academics. Parents must have active parental consent to help control this trend and to be fully aware of each survey given to their children. She suggested doing the surveys somewhere else besides in school like shopping malls, state fairs, sporting events and any number of places to get large groups of children in a random sampling. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained that this bill allows for the parent to give one time per year permission to participate in an anonymous survey, but it also requires that the parent be notified before the survey happens and be given another chance to opt out. He asked if that meets her criteria for keeping the parents informed. MS. ETTER responded that she is not in favor of any survey that is not academic being given to her children without her permission prior to that survey. Number 1530 BETH SHOBER, Health Specialist, Teaching and Learning Support, Department of Education (DOE), came forward to testify on behalf the DOE to express some of their concerns about the possible unintended consequences of this proposed legislation. There are two major areas that could possibly be impacted dependant upon the interpretation. One is on curriculum and implementation of curriculum, and the other is on counseling services within the school. She shared copies of an article called "Emotional Lessons" which appeared in "NW Education, Spring 1999". Perhaps the intent is not to impact curriculum in the implementation of programs, but it could be interpreted that way. This article is an example. It speaks very well to the issues of dispelling fears after a crisis like the one experienced in Bethel. This article highlights some things happening in Bethel, Alaska now as a result of the school shooting there in 1997: children are being allowed to share common feelings and to discuss them. Students in Bethel are processing through the heartache produced by the school shooting. Under the broad, possible interpretation of this legislation, that program would be in conflict. The article shows specific examples of how that might be interpreted as in conflict of this legislation. MS. SHOBER expressed concern regarding the counseling needs of high-risk students in the schools. Often counselors and teaching staff find it difficult to gain written permission from parents or guardians of those students who are displaying the greatest need for intervention. This population certainly may not make up the bulk of students receiving services, however, their needs may be more extreme. Although several attempts are often made to reach these families to secure written permission, the follow-through on the part of the family is very difficult at times. Counseling staff may feel compelled to intervene on behalf of the student after making a good-faith effort to reach and receive written parental permission without success. Even after services begin in schools, counseling staff continues to attempt to include family members in the services that are being provided. Examples of these services could be anger management, good decision making and risk reduction, refusal skills, and so on. If the assessment by a trained counselor determines that the student is in need of more intensive therapeutic intervention, he will refer the student to the appropriate agencies outside of the school building. None of those assessments or those counseling services could be provided under the possible interpretation of this legislation. Number 1364 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON gathered that she was referring to Section 1 (a) where it refers to written consent for psychological testing. MS. SHOBER answered yes, in part through the counseling concern, that would be the case. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the logical inference from DOE's perspective would be that, in addition to providing education, the school should be able to provide counseling, for example, psychological treatment, without the parent's permission. MS. SHOBER believes the DOE is saying, dependant upon the interpretation of the words, that students are exhibiting behaviors that are not allowing them to sit and participate in a regular classroom structure. For example, in the article, elementary students are dealing with lots of anger management and social skills that don't make it possible for them to participate in the regular curricular activities. Lots of times counseling staff will attempt to intervene and help that student get back on track. The attempt to make contact with parents before they try to do anything with the child may be the cause of some of these problems. It has come to the attention of the department that often times it is not possible to get written permission. Parents have the form but forget to send it in; follow-up phone calls don't result in getting the written permission back. The bottom line is the student is left without any kind of intervention services; the class is left struggling with how to incorporate the behavior into the curricular day; and the counselors are trying to intervene on behalf of the student to help assist in any way they can. MS. SHOBER agreed that intensive psychotherapy is not the role of a school counselor, but often times in those kinds of assessments in helping students get back on track with their behavior problems or social interaction problems, it comes forth that there are some other problems that are evident that are in need of greater psychological help. That is when the counselor would work with the family to refer to an agency outside of the school. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON sees the dilemma and is trying to help. He doesn't want the school doing any heavy-duty psychological counseling with the student without the parents' knowledge. Finally, if the parents refuse to get involved, there may be a child in need of aid. The parents who it is the most difficult to get permission from and get them involved are often the ones that have the students who need the most assistance. He asked Ms. Shober if the school got permission at enrollment for the school counselor to be able to interact with the student, would that help her concerns. MS. SHOBER believes that would answer some of the concerns. Number 1082 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked what is the alternative to having the counselor not intervening in those situations when the students are off track. MS. SHOBER said it depends case by case because every student is different. Students who are unable to cooperate, share, listen, stop harassing or hitting their neighbors, playground harassment, fighting, the DOE feels those type of behaviors are destructive to the overall academic success of students. They are attempting with schools to offer every kind of assistance possible to change those behaviors. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked what happens in schools without those intervention services. Number 0972 MS. SHOBER said each district has adopted its own discipline plan so it varies. Some districts don't have the staff to do anything at this point, and they are barely getting by. Other districts have very extensive programs and immediately help those students. CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL commented that when any counseling goes on, the parents are encouraged or involved at a very early level. MS. SHOBER indicated that there is always the attempt to make contact with those parents and help discuss and offer help in a variety of ways. The concern is many times the parents are not responding when the student is having difficulty during the school day and they are struggling to work out the conflicting pieces. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON referred to page 2, line 30 (e) "Written consent required under (a) of this section is valid until the commencement of the subsequent school year," and commented that his reading of the legislation is that all the things on page 1 are covered. He told Ms. Shober if she gets a legal opinion that he is wrong, and it doesn't cover her concerns, he will call this back to the committee to amend it. Number 0735 DOUGLAS GARDNER, Assistant Attorney General, Oil, Gas and Mining Section, Civil Division (Juneau), Department of Law, came forward to testify representing the Departments of Law and Health and Social Services DHSS, Division of Family and Youth Services DFYS. He doesn't represent the Department of Education, but he offered to attempt to answer any questions the committee may have. He reviewed the CS with the DFYS and they had some problems with subsections (h) and (i) so he offered an amendment to clarify the problem. He doesn't believe it was Co-Chairman Dyson's intention to give an opportunity of different interpretation of some of the reports-of-harm requirements in AS 47. The two departments proposed that subsections (h) and (i) be scaled down to just (h). The focus of (h) would be to track AS 47.17.020 and AS 47.17.027 which are the reporting requirements that school officials are well trained to follow. It is the department's view that these subsections might give a court pause and there are long-term interpretations that they wouldn't want to see upset. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Gardner to show them exactly where the wording differs. Number 0520 MR. GARDNER replied that they essentially added the underlined language and took out the language in capital letters and brackets. He said he wasn't sure what the legislation was trying to achieve, they made the assumption that Co-Chairman Dyson was trying to track the normal reporting requirements in AS 47.17 and wasn't trying to change those, and in (i) he was trying to make it clear that the DHSS is exempted from notification requirements. CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON explained they didn't want this parental permission to keep the department from reporting a child in need of aid. MR. GARDNER said they just wanted to be clear that the reporting requirements haven't been changed, and they changed the language to use the language in the existing statute. Number 0402 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Gardner to comment if they are on the right track in regards to the concerns expressed by Ms. Shober. MR. GARDNER said he isn't familiar with that area. He would have to follow up later. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked for clarification on some of the deleted language. TAPE 99-38, SIDE A MR. GARDNER answered that the deletion of some of the language in subsection (h) was done because that issue has been addressed in other statutes. He explained that there are situations that need to be reported to the DHSS or law enforcement agencies and not to the parents. Number 0110 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON made a motion to adopt Amendment 1, which read: (h) Unless the matter must be reported to the Department of Health and Social Services under AS 47.17.020 or the records or information were received in the course of an investigation by that department under AS 47.17.027, a school employee or agent who believes that a situation exists [IF, AFTER RECEIVING RECORDS OR INFORMATION, A SCHOOL EMPLOYEE OR AGENT BELIEVES THAT A SITUATION EXISTS] that presents a serious threat to the well-being of a student, the school employee or agent shall notify the student's parent or guardian without delay. [IF, HOWEVER, THE MATTER HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEPARTMENT TO NOTIFY THE STUDENT'S PARENT OR GUARDIAN OF ANY POSSIBLE INVESTIGATION BEFORE THE STUDENT'S RETURN HOME FORM SCHOOL.] [(I) THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES MAY BE EXEMPTED FROM THE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN (H) OF THIS SECTION ONLY IF THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT THE STUDENT WOULD BE ENDANGERED BY NOTIFICATION OF THE STUDENT'S PARENT OR GUARDIAN OR IF THIS NOTIFICATION IS OTHERWISE PROHIBITED BY STATE OR FEDERAL LAW.] CO-CHAIRMAN COGHILL asked whether there was any objection. There being none, Amendment 1 was adopted. Number 0160 CO-CHAIRMAN DYSON stated that he is committed that if Ms. Shober or Mr. Gardner find anything that needs to be fixed in this legislation, it will be fixed. If there is an unintended result of this legislation and it ends up being an insurmountable barrier to getting the survey done, he is committed to fixing any problems. It is not his intention to mess things up. Number 0381 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move the proposed CSHB 70, version 1-LSO263\G, Ford, 4/6/99, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 70(HES) moved from the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee. ADJOURNMENT Number 0412 There being no further business before the committee, the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:51 p.m.