Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Proceedings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Department of Health and Welfare seeks to remove additional-court‑hearing requirement in juvenile adoption cases; RS31804C1 sent to print
Summary
Jared Larson of the Department of Health and Welfare presented RS31804C1 to restore prior practice after an Idaho Supreme Court interpretation required an additional hearing for youth in department custody. The committee voted to send the RS to print and the department said it would bring experts to the hearing.
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Proceedings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jared Larson, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs Chief for the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, told the Senate Health and Welfare Committee that RS31804C1 would amend the juvenile‑procedure statute in section 16‑2005(8) to restore the pre‑existing process after an Idaho Supreme Court interpretation had compelled an additional hearing for youth in the department's custody.
Larson said the department believes the additional hearing has added two to four months on average to the time youth remain in state custody and that reducing unnecessary delay would help the department achieve permanency more quickly for children. He said the department will bring subject‑matter experts to the bill hearing to explain the practice, and that lawmakers Senator Shippey had worked with the department on the draft.
Senator Wintrow said she supported sending the RS to print and encouraged the department to bring experts to the hearing so the committee could balance parent rights with children's need for permanency. The committee voted to send RS31804C1 to print; no roll‑call vote was taken.
Larson noted the department had sometimes been required to hold the court‑ordered additional hearing even when parents stipulated to termination of parental rights, and that the purpose and content of the extra hearing was unclear. The RS seeks to restore the status quo ante so that the additional hearing would not be required in those cases.
