Lawmakers hear bill to tighten child-protection policy, discourage placement of children outside U.S.

Representative Bill Mercer, sponsor of House Bill 694, told the Senate Public Health Committee that the bill would tighten the declaration of policy in Title 41, chapter 3 so state intervention in families follows a finding of abuse or neglect and so that placement of children outside the United States is "disfavored," with an exception for cases governed by the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Representative Bill Mercer is a member of the Montana House (House District 52).

The bill matters because it would change the statutory declaration of policy that guides Child and Family Services (CFS) and the courts, language Mercer said should reflect the thresholds already required elsewhere in Title 41. "Let's ensure that we don't have the state intervening unless there is an allegation of abuse or neglect," Mercer said.

Division Administrator Nikki Grossberg, who identified herself as the Division Administrator for Child and Family Services, said the department has used out‑of‑country placements very rarely. Grossberg told the committee that such placements sometimes involve a biological parent returning to another country, or when relatives who intend to adopt later move overseas. "It is very rare that this would occur," Grossberg said. She added the department does not expect the language to change its current safety model or everyday practice.

Senators on the committee raised questions about whether the bill's policy language would affect burdens of proof and court processes elsewhere in Title 41. Senator Emmerich asked whether the bill creates a requirement for a judicial finding of abuse or neglect before CFS may intervene; Mercer and Grossberg told the committee the bill primarily amends the declaratory language that guides policy and does not change the statutory burdens of proof that courts apply in removals or termination proceedings. Mercer said the bill "brings [the declaration of policy] into conformity with what the balance of 41‑3 is trying to do." Senator Emmerich and others pressed for clarity on how the declaration would interact with existing statutory standards.

On the topic of placement outside the United States, Mercer said the added subsection would signal reunification policy favors proximity and that moving a child abroad makes reunification more difficult; the bill includes a limited ICWA exemption in specified lines. Committee members asked if the policy would apply in custodial cases involving foreign nationals; Mercer and Grossberg said they would need to examine specific custody statutes and the bill's scope but reiterated that the amendment is intended to discourage, not categorically prohibit, out‑of‑country placements.

The hearing closed with Mercer asking the committee to give favorable consideration to House Bill 694. No formal action was taken during the hearing.

Looking ahead, questions committee members pressed on (statutory interaction with Title 41 burdens of proof, and the scope for cases involving foreign nationals) are the principal follow‑ups likely to guide any amendment or committee direction.