BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 217 Page 1 Date of Hearing: March 17, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Mark Stone, Chair AB 217 (Maienschein) - As Introduced February 2, 2015 PROPOSED CONSENT SUBJECT: DEPENDENCY HEARINGS: FOSTER CHILD PARTICIPATION KEY ISSUE: SHOULD foster children be NOTIFIED OF THEIR RIGHT TO ATTEND, and participate in, their dependency hearings, WHERE CRITICAL, LIFE-CHANGING DECISIONS ARE MADE? SYNOPSIS Similar to prior measures, this bill continues California's effort in enabling dependent children to be a part of the court process that can affect all aspects of their lives. Traditionally, a child who was the subject of a dependency proceeding was only allowed to attend the hearing, not participate. However, the State adopted a new approach. In 2003, the Legislature approved a bill - AB 408 (Steinberg), Chap. 813 - which, among other things, afforded a minor the right to participate and address the court in a dependency hearing. Then in 2008, the Legislature approved another dependency participation bill - AB 3051 (Judiciary), Chap. 166 - which authorized a court to postpone a dependency hearing if it AB 217 Page 2 was necessary to allow a child to participate unless a continuance was not in the child's best interest. This bill, sponsored by the Children's Advocacy Institute, reaffirms California's commitment to ensure that children in foster care are able to have a meaningful opportunity to participate in their dependency court hearings. This bill simply requires the court to inform the dependent child during the proceeding that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing. This bill is consistent with recommendations from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, and the Judicial Council Blue Ribbon Commission. This bill is supported by Children Now, the County Welfare Directors Association, and Juvenile Court Judges of California. There is no known opposition. SUMMARY: Provides a child who is the subject of a dependency hearing notice about his or her right to participate in the dependency hearing. Specifically, this bill requires the court to inform a child present at and the subject of a dependency hearing that he or she has a right to address the court and participate in the hearing. EXISTING LAW: 1)Requires that, among others, children 10 and over receive notice of their dependency hearings, including the initial petition hearing, jurisdictional hearings and review hearings. (Welfare & Institutions Code Sections 290.1-295. All further statutory references are to that code unless otherwise stated.) 2)Allows a minor who is the subject of a dependency hearing and who is entitled notice of the hearing to be present at the AB 217 Page 3 hearing. (Section 349.) 3)Allows a minor present at the hearing the right to address the court and to participate in the hearing. Allows that minor to be represented at the hearing by counsel of his or her choice. (Section 349.) 4)If the minor is 10 or older and not present at the hearing, requires the court to determine whether the minor was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing. If the minor was not properly notified, or wished to be present at the hearing, the court may continue the hearing to allow the minor to be present, unless the court determines that it is not in the best interest of the child to do so. (Section 349.) 5)At the hearing to terminate parental rights or establish guardianship, requires the court to consider the wishes of the dependent child and to act in the child's best interests. Requires the court, if the child who is 10 and over is not present at the hearing, to determine whether the minor was properly notified of his or her right to attend the hearing and inquire as to the reason why the child is not present. (Section 366.26(h).) FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal. COMMENTS: According to the author: AB 217 Page 4 For California's abused and neglected children, the future lies within a confusing tangle of government offices and crucial legal proceedings, called juvenile dependency hearings. During these hearings, the fate of where the child will reside and how their future will unfold is decided. Current law allows a minor to speak during dependency hearings if the minor so desires, but this is not made explicitly clear to the minor, who may very well be confused and overwhelmed by the weight and formality of the court hearing. AB 217 will simply require the court to inform the minor of his or her right to address the court and participate in the hearing. This fix allows a child to make his or her voice and desires heard, and empower[s] that child to possibly influence a decision that will affect that child for life. Dependency court decisions dramatically impact children's lives. When children are removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect, they are placed under the jurisdiction of the dependency court. The dependency court gets to decide where they live, whom they live with, and whether they can see their family again. The court even decides whether to terminate parental rights and begin adoption proceedings. However, even though these hearings affect just about every aspect of a child's life, many children do not know about their right to participate. Experts believe that foster children who have some say in the major decisions in their life are more apt to succeed than those who do not. Studies have shown that there are many advantages to youth participation at dependency hearings: "Attending court benefits both the youth and the court. Youth have the opportunity to understand the process by seeing firsthand the court proceedings. They also develop a sense of control over the AB 217 Page 5 process when they actively participate. The court learns more about children than simply what is presented in reports." (Andrea Khoury, Seen and Heard: Involving Children in Dependency Court, 25 ABA Child Law Practice Vol. 10, p. 150 (Dec. 2006).) The latter point is reiterated by the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, which found that the quality of decisions is improved when judges can hear and see the key parties. The Commission found: Children, parents, and caregivers all benefit when they have the opportunity to actively participate in court proceedings, as does the quality of decisions when judges can see and hear from key parties. State court leaders should consider the impact of factors such as court room and waiting area accommodations, case scheduling, use of technology in the court room, and translation of written materials. These issues can make the process more accessible and meaningful for all participants, including children. (Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Fostering the Future: Safety, Permanence and Well-Being for Children in Foster Care, p. 42 (May, 2004).) Recommendations from the Judicial Council California Blue Ribbon Commission on Foster Care provide further support for this bill. The Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care (Commission) was appointed by Chief Justice Ronald George in 2006 to develop recommendations on how courts and their partner entities could improve child welfare and fairness outcomes. The Commission's recommendations, issued in May 2009, provide support for this bill. The Commission found: AB 217 Page 6 The courts are often the unseen partners in child welfare, but every child and parent in the foster-care system knows it is the courts where critical decisions are made, including such life-changing questions as where and with whom a child will live. When dependency court judges and attorneys are not acquainted with "100 percent" of the child, when there is inadequate time or not enough information to make informed decisions, hearings are likely to be rushed or delayed. Children and families suffer. Of particular relevance to this legislation, the Commission determined that all participants in dependency hearings, including children and families, should have an opportunity to be heard and meaningfully participate in court. To that end, the Commission recommended, among other things, the following: Judicial officers identify and engage all parties in each case as early as possible; Judicial officers and other stakeholders remove barriers that prevent children, parents, and caregivers from attending hearings; Hearings be available at times that do not conflict with school or work or other requirements of a family's case plan; All parties, including children, parents, and social workers, have the opportunity to review reports and meet with their attorneys before the initial hearing and in advance of all subsequent hearings; AB 217 Page 7 All parties leave court hearings with a clear understanding of what happened, why decisions were made, and if appropriation, what actions they need to take; The AOC provide judicial officers and court participants with education and support to create courtroom environments that promote communication with, and participation of, all parties, including children, that takes into account age, development, language, and cultural issues. (California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care, Final Report and Action Plan: Fostering a New Future for California's Children (May 2009).) Given that this bill seeks to ensure that children are informed about their right to participate in their dependency hearings, this bill advances the Commission's recommendations to allow children to meaningfully participate in their hearings. While this bill does not address all issues surrounding court attendance, it furthers the goal of making the court process accessible for foster children. The bill helps ensure that children understand that their voice matters in a court proceeding. This bill, however, does not address all of the issues that may make participation difficult. This includes a legislatively established transportation mandate, although current law does allow a court to issue orders necessary to ensure that the child has an opportunity to be present. Moreover, this bill does not address the high ratio of child-clients to dependency lawyers, or the need for additional funding to tackle the growing caseloads of dependency lawyers, although current law provides that all children be afforded with the right of appointed counsel in a dependency hearing. AB 217 Page 8 ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The Children's Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego School of Law states: that while "children are permitted to speak if they [are asked to], too few do [so] because of how intimidating the setting is." The Children's Advocacy Institute contends that AB 217 will encourage judges to be "mindful of how intimidating and awesome the proceeding might feel" to the child by "[inviting] the child in every proceeding to speak." REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Children's Advocacy Institute - University of San Diego School of Law (sponsor) Children Now County Welfare Directors Association of California Juvenile Court Judges of California Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by:Leora Gershenzon and Eric Dang / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 AB 217 Page 9