[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6665147,"mediaKeyId","2364040-4ae43de04dc2d60b22a6e73ec0db4cf1","parentId",2364040,"title","Judicial Juvenile Committee passes amended House Bill 253 to limit court-ordered out-of-state reunification programs","audioSeconds",3867,"startMs",2119000,"endMs",5986000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2364040-4ae43de04dc2d60b22a6e73ec0db4cf1&start=2119&end=5986","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2364040-4ae43de04dc2d60b22a6e73ec0db4cf1/thumbnail_2119000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6665147/Georgia/Judicial-Juvenile-Committee-passes-amended-House-Bill-253-to-limit-court-ordered-out-of-state-reunification-programs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6665147-3a874457c38cc6ae5d37f1bf2697c720/orig.mp4?Expires=1776626195&Signature=MxNCMhoYN5JuVWDGF9rbm~LPFooPWHP3ZoO78m-MHWlYYQ-PN~dLHjI3QYcTlpjn6rdw5z9t9S2YYetV30zRGXgHzV3WxlzVnojfWxjCk1m3nyJwEgcOqjP0xIxnQ-MMzgT2OexHzQx7Obdk0-xBDXEdQNs~x8fkaTBx4TrnnhABmNQEqOMxB3-s95KqJn7PuGTVRUPfAjadUQn3TFsV3R3Ay~WgogdWzvZUHjEe1DLUaxLfeyT-oEDueFOXiAbK0OzEkLKot01zDyhsS3mIdFzq2fa~0uyiuLWIyVOxSCOZr7zIbCI8I7nH6fKyx6bFtMBciTxjH7kRnxXEiaCEhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","State of Georgia ","date","2025-02-20T20:12:55.563Z","article","The Judicial Juvenile Committee approved a committee substitute to House Bill 253 — the measure commonly described during the hearing as “Ethan’s Law” — and amended it to narrow the bill’s scope and add two specific prohibitions before passing it by voice vote.

Representative Clark guided the committee through the substitute (LC 481514S) and the proposed amendment. Committee members and witnesses said the substitute narrowed the bill to focus on prohibiting court-ordered family reunification or unification programs that remove a child from a custodial parent and place the child in camps or out-of-state stays that limit contact with the child’s guardian. The amendment the committee adopted added two express prohibitions: (1) no-court-ordered periods of no contact between a child and a parent or legal guardian as part of such programs, and (2) out-of-state stays as part of a reunification program.

The committee’s discussion included legal and practical questions. Judge Neil Bridal, president of the Council of Juvenile Court Judges, told the committee that juvenile court judges appeared unlikely to have ordered such programs and that many instances identified by the committee occurred in superior court proceedings. Committee members also expressed concerns about payment and oversight of counselors or evaluators; Representative Clark said language requiring appointment of a counselor had been removed from the substitute.

After a brief floor reading of the amendment (labeled “amendment A” in committee), a member moved to pass the bill as amended and another member seconded. The committee voted by voice; members answered “aye,” and no recorded oppositions were raised on the transcript. The chair announced the bill passed the committee as amended.

The amendment and passage change the substitute by explicitly forbidding judges from ordering family-reunification camps, workshops or similar programs that (a) violate an existing court order requiring no contact, (b) rely on private youth transporters that use force or create acutely distressing circumstances, or (c) place a child in an out-of-state stay as part of a reunification program. The committee did not record a roll-call tally in the transcript; the record shows a voice vote in favor and the chair’s announcement that the bill passed.

Next steps: the committee signed the substitute and Representative Clark took the paperwork; the committee then adjourned and members indicated they might follow up with staff for clarifying language.

Votes at a glance: House Bill 253 (LC 481514S), as amended by amendment A — Passed by voice vote (aye recorded; no recorded opposing votes on the transcript).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Judiciary Juvenile 02.20.25","oneSentenceSummary","The committee approved a committee substitute for House Bill 253 (LC 481514S), amending it to prohibit judges from ordering certain family ‘reunification’ camps and out-of-state stays and to bar orders that enforce no-contact periods inconsistent with court orders; the measure passed by voice vote.","taxTitle","Judiciary, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Georgia","taxId",17225,"location","Georgia","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6665152,"Juvenile court judges brief committee on caseloads, family treatment courts and staffing needs",3081,2173000,5254000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2364040-4ae43de04dc2d60b22a6e73ec0db4cf1&start=2173&end=5254","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2364040-4ae43de04dc2d60b22a6e73ec0db4cf1/thumbnail_2173000.jpg","/articles/6665152/Georgia/Juvenile-court-judges-brief-committee-on-caseloads-family-treatment-courts-and-staffing-needs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6665152-66d73e86e21f37e515ec0ae01278ef4f/orig.mp4?Expires=1776626195&Signature=Lv2mxHLcWFMHlBOuIU3N1xRBnuCrFf5EbG1YfqDILd3RRxlEs7uRK97tgQCRoJnpCEnYIrAJxW2Zau2EFYfJfUYzcSUxQBARrlB2YzGayl5gsPoDJrPOKYvRDgA-OIWgtMqGbo4Ep8NSXeBihbBp~ZIlNjUl8LjPxr65DVx8lgqO2SmQbY41sixt4-cr12dZ0Xt3Jwtf0UZOLB-6NQ6ExKrjyYBa~g1IQvRTZ29KWarEyIyZvU8qUBT1JgLaxA2IaVW7x~sCktdwMMca~KSJpUsmDagcqaDoYpo8G-Xca7khu9O0Zf3IsSZmwSpeOwE~nv-H5Ondm29O1jZhQkJxyQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Judges who preside over juvenile courts across several Georgia circuits told the Judicial Juvenile Committee that rising caseloads, substance-use trends and limited staffing shape how their courts handle dependency and delinquency cases.

The judges — including Judge Tom Parmer of the West Georgia Circuit, Judge Monica Wilburn of Houston County, Judge Shay Young of the Macon Judicial Circuit and Judge Jeremy Clow of the Enodo Judicial Circuit — described programs such as family treatment courts, juvenile mental health courts and county-funded staff that they said support reunification and case management. The judges also described variation across counties in staffing, funding sources and local practices.

The presentation mattered because committee members are considering legislation and oversight affecting juvenile court operations and child-welfare practice. Judges said local funding and county-level decisions determine whether courts can add associate judges, bailiffs and clerical staff, and they gave examples of how those resources affect the speed and scope of case processing.

Judges described a mix of dependency (child-welfare) and delinquency caseloads. Judge Monica Wilburn said her circuit handles foster-care and family-preservation caseloads alongside truancy and CHINS (child in need of services) matters, and described about 78 foster children and roughly 40 family-preservation cases in her county. Judge Parmer said his Carroll/West Georgia circuit oversees more than 200 children in foster care across the circuit, with most in Carroll County, and described a family treatment court that has enrolled dozens of parents and reported multiple reunifications.

Speakers emphasized the administrative load juvenile judges carry. One judge said the court reads thousands of pages of exhibits a year and reviews attorney billing entries to ensure public funds are used appropriately. Several judges said that the complexity of dependency cases — multiple parties, numerous documents and frequent statutory review intervals — makes simple case-count metrics an incomplete measure of workload.

Judges and committee members also discussed substance-use patterns. Multiple judges said methamphetamine remains a major factor in dependency filings, and several described growing fentanyl use among parents and community members as an emerging challenge that affects child safety and reunification prospects.

Judges described local responses and programs. Examples given included family treatment courts (one judge noted 57 participants with about 30 returning to full custody in recent years), a Plan of Safe Care program for mothers with substance-use disorders that supports families before and after birth, juvenile mental-health accountability courts, and diversion programs that prevent many CHINS cases from reaching formal adjudication.

Committee members asked how judges obtain additional judicial and administrative positions. Judges said they typically presented workload data — such as comparisons with neighboring circuits, exhibit counts and historical studies from the Administrative Office of the Courts — to their county commissions when requesting funding for associate judges, clerks or other staff. Several judges stressed that adding a judge requires additional county-funded support (bailiffs, support staff, equipment) and sometimes intergovernmental agreements across counties in a circuit.

Judges also described local collaborations with schools, law enforcement and DFCS (Department of Family and Children Services) to address truancy and child-safety concerns, and noted that some counties run specialized sheriff or juvenile divisions to improve communication and response.

Judges answered committee questions about transfers of delinquency cases to superior court, saying transfers occur but are relatively uncommon in some circuits and more frequent in others depending on prosecutorial practice and the severity of alleged offenses.

The judges concluded by offering to provide additional data and contact information to committee members who requested case counts, staffing details and program descriptions.

Less-critical details: committee members thanked the judges and noted that the presentations highlighted regional variation across Georgia in how juvenile courts are structured and funded. The committee did not take formal action during the presentation; the judges’ remarks were introductory to the agenda item on House Bill 253 that followed.","Judges from multiple juvenile court circuits described heavy caseloads, program successes and staffing challenges — including rising substance-use impacts, reliance on county funding and use of family treatment courts — during a Judicial Juvenile Committee hearing.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judicial Juvenile Committee passes amended House Bill 253 to limit court-ordered out-of-state reunification programs

Juvenile court judges brief committee on caseloads, family treatment courts and staffing needs