Recent Trends in Dependency Law

February 7, 2018

• CASE LAW

• STATUTES

• NEW TRENDS IN DEPENDENCY

Case LawJURISDICTION/DISPOSITION

(g) Allegations

Incarcerated Parents: Can they make a plan?

• In re M.R., 7 Cal.App.5th 886 (4th Dist. Div. 2 (San Bernardino County) 1/20/17, mod. 2/9/17)

Gun RiskPerpetrator out of home by the time of jurisdiction.

Is gun loaded? Age of child?

• In re Yolanda L., 7 Cal.App.5th 987 (2nd Dist., Div. 8 (Los Angeles County) 1/24/17)

• In re C.V. (15 Cal.App.5th 566) 2017

Mental Health RiskMental Health issues alone is not a risk.

• In re Joaquin C., 15 Cal.App.5th 537 (2nd Dist., Div. 1 (Los Angeles County) 9/1/17)

• In re A.L., Cal.App.5th (2nd Dist., Div.1 Los Angeles County November 3, 2017)

Alcohol and Drug RiskPrior use and current incident is enough.

• In re M.R., 8 Cal.App.5th 101 (2nd Dist., Div. 5 (Los Angeles County) 1/6/17, mod. 2/1/17)

• In re Alexzander C. (November 29, 2017)

Incorrigible TeensMust a Parent be at Fault?

• In re R.T., 3 Cal.5th 622 (Chin, J., 7/20/17)

Non Minor DependentsImportant to be in care on 18th Birthday.

• In re David B. (12 Cal.App.5th 633)

• In re Jesse S. (12 Cal.App.5th 611)

• In re H.C. (17 Cal.App.5th 1261

Dual Status 241.1 assessment needs to have complete information.

• In re R.G. (18 Cal.App.5th 273)

Conditional Removal Risk assessment must happen before each removal.

• In re C.M., 15 Cal.App.5th 376 (4th Dist., Div. 1 (San Diego County) 9/15/17)

Reasonable ServicesThe burden is on the County to provide services, and they must be in the parent’s language.

• In re J.P. (14 Cal.App.5th 616)

• In re A.G. (12 Cal.App.5th 994)

• In re T.W.-1 (9 Cal.App.5th 339)

PaternityIt’s the relationship.

• In re L.L. (13 Cal.App.5th 1302)

• In re M.R. (7 Cal.App.5th 886)

RemovalProtective Custody Warrant

AB 1401 (Maienschein; WIC § 340): authorizes the court to issue a protective custody warrant, without first filing a petition in the juvenile court, if there is/are:

• probable cause to believe the minor comes within the jurisdiction of the court;

• a substantial danger to the safety or to the physical or emotional health of the child; and,

• no reasonable means to protect the child’s safety or physical health without removal.

RemovalAB 1332 (Bloom) Remove the problem; not the child

Prohibits the removal of a child from the physical custody of his or her parent with whom the child did not reside at the time a dependency petition was initiated, unless the juvenile court finds clear and convincing evidence that there would be a substantial danger to the physical health, safety, protection, or physical or emotional well- being of the child not to do so. (W&I 361)

The court shall consider, as a reasonable means to protect the minor, each of the following:

(A) The option of removing an offending parent or guardian from the home.

(B) Allowing a non-offending parent or guardian to retain physical custody as long as that parent or guardian presents a plan acceptable to the court demonstrating that he or she will be able to protect the child from future harm.

E-Filing: It’s Here!With specified conditions and limitations. (AB 976; Various Codes)

Electronic service requires express consent per CCP§1010.6 and may be withdrawn at any time.

No electronic service on children under 10; child over 10 not without attorney agreement; children 16-18 after consultation with their attorney.

When dependency case closes, TRO’s and exit orders must be filed in family law case or create a dummy case file.

2nd Opinions: SB 89Health: SB 89

Among other things, includes statutory changes to clarify how to pay for second opinions on requests to authorize the use of specified psychotropic medications in dependency children. (WIC 369.6)

DelinquencyAB 878 (Mike Gipson) limits the use of restraints (handcuffs/shackles) during transport and in court.

SB 395 requires children 15 years or younger to consult with an attorney before being able to waive their Miranda rights during a police interrogation.

AB 529 will require counties to seal juvenile records once a charge has been dismissed.

College Bound!SB 12 (Jim Beall) widens foster youth access to college by: expanding the number of community college campus support programs; streamlining the Pell grant’s application process; and insuring case plans name who will help each foster youth with their college and financial aid applications.

AB 1567 (Chris Holden) provides information to self-identified foster youth at some California colleges about existing campus support programs when they enrolled.

More Voters!SB 332 (Henry Stern) Requires Social Workers to provide 18+ youth with voter registration forms.

Human trafficking victims qualify for NMD statusAB 604 (Mike Gipson) allows youth who had committed crimes to enter the system as NMDs when their petition/adjudication order was dismissed/vacated because the youth was a CSEC victim (involved in sex trafficking) so long as they meet the eligibility criteria. It also removes some barriers for older transition-age youth to re-enter foster care if they experienced a failed guardianship or adoption after age 18.

Teens’ babies can not be removed without consulting teens’ attorneyAB 1371 (Mark Stone) Prohibits the removal of a foster youth’s children until the foster youth first has the opportunity to consult with an attorney.

NMD’s CAN live with parentAll County Letter (ACL) 17-83 Non-Minor Dependents (NMDs) assessed as being ready for a Supervised Independent Living Placement (SILP) may nowreside in an approved and fully funded SILP in the same home as a parent or guardian, including the parent or guardian from whom the youth was initially removed.

SB 438: SUCCESSOR GUARDIAN Allows the naming of a proposed successor guardian during the assessment process for a legal guardian, and allows the assessment and appointment of such a named successor guardian in the event of the death or incapacity of an appointed guardian. (WIC 366.26, subd. (d).)

CCR (Continuum of Care Reform Act)The state is currently in the midst of implementing a series of new laws known as Continuum of Care Reform (CCR) that seeks to place foster children in family settings instead of in group homes.

AB 404/16505.1: Case Plan Placement Priority1. relatives,

2. nonrelative extended family members, and tribal members;

3. foster family homes,

4. resource families, and approved or certified homes of foster family agencies;

5. followed by intensive services foster care homes; or multidimensional treatment foster care homes or therapeutic foster care homes;

6. group care placements in the order of short-term residential therapeutic programs,

7. group homes (formerly known as),

8. community treatment facilities,

9. out-of-state residential treatment

AB 404 (Mark Stone): Placement Preference Applies to ALL Relatives /NREFM

Among other things, grants a placement preference for a dependent child to any relative, instead of only to specified relatives. Allows increased child participation in placement hearings with resource families. (Various Codes )

Relaxed Rules on Criminal ConvictionsSB 213: (Holly Mitchell) aims to boost the number of placements of foster children with relative caregivers in the state by changing the types of criminal convictions that can disqualify a caregiver’s ability to participate in the foster care system.

Transitional HousingSB 612 (Holly Mitchell) authorizes transitional housing to either 16-18 year old foster youth, or 18-21 year olds, and requires training for host families and program managers to promote the youths’ transition to adulthood.

More Help to Keep Kids in Family SettingsAB 501 (Sebastian Ridley-Thomas) increases crisis services for youth by adding a new category for children’s mental health crisis residential programs, which will also align with the state’s changes to congregate care under CCR.

AB507 (Blanca Rubio) requires that counties offer specialized training to foster parents in the state, in addition to the basic state-mandated foster parent training program.

SB 233 (Jim Beall) increases access for caregivers to foster children’s education records and requires training on the educational rights of foster youth for foster parents.

AB 1006 (Brian Maienschein) requires adoptive and resource families in the state’s child welfare system to receive information about specialized permanency and mental health services.

Continuum Care of Reform Act (CCR)New Statutes to Help Implement the 2017 Act.

Child and Family Teaming (CFTs) If CASA is providing a service, then they have the right to be a part of the team. However, must be sensitive to a family's feelings for privacy and possible shame.

Domestic ViolenceNew approaches trying to keep child with non-violent parent, but still should not put a child at risk.

Recreational MarijuanaPossible effects for youth?

How to instruct volunteers?

Rule 5.655 is Slated for ChangeSince delinquent youths and NMDs may now be appointed CASAs, Rule 5.655 will soon reflect that much of the rule subdivisions will be re-numbered.

Effective January 1, 2019, will likely be the optional new form JV-474, which will require the written consent/signature of the NMD and the NMD's attorney to allow CASAs to copy and inspect the NMD court file.

Questions?If you would like to stay on for the Q & A section of this webinar, you are more than welcome. If you need to go, thank you for joining us today!