House hearing examines bill to clarify when parents may allow children independent activities

HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania House Children & Youth Committee held an informational hearing on HB 1873 on Oct. 25, 2025, hearing testimony from researchers, legal advocates and parents who said the bill would clarify when parents may allow children to engage in age‑appropriate independent activities without triggering child protective services or criminal investigations.

Proponents told the committee that vague state language about “proper” or “adequate” care has led to reports and investigations in ordinary situations such as a child walking two blocks from a bus stop, siblings playing outside while a parent gardens, or an older sibling briefly supervising a younger child. “We have to let kids be kids, but we also have to let parents be parents,” Lenore Skenazy, president and co‑founder of Let Grow, said in her testimony.

HB 1873, lead‑sponsored by Chairwoman McNeil and co‑sponsored by Representatives Kajewski and Zimmerman, would amend state dependency and endangerment language to specify that parents may permit a “child of sufficient maturity” to engage in listed independent activities and that such permission is not, by itself, child abuse or neglect. Supporters said the change aims to reduce what they described as unnecessary investigations and long‑term harms — including placement on the state ChildLine registry — that can follow hotline calls.

Why it matters: Advocates and some lawmakers said the current vagueness deters parents from allowing ordinary, developmentally appropriate freedoms, and that investigations can carry lasting consequences for low‑income families. Mariel Musak, a staff attorney with the Youth Justice Project at Community Legal Services of Philadelphia, described a client, identified as “Alice” to protect privacy, who was placed on the child abuse registry after leaving her 1‑year‑old briefly with a 13‑year‑old sibling. “She was labeled a child abuser and placed on the child abuse registry,” Musak said. Musak and other legal advocates said that even when families successfully appeal reports, the time, cost and collateral consequences can be substantial.

Researchers and clinicians on the panel cited evidence linking declines in children’s independent play and exploration with increases in anxiety and depression. Peter Gray, a research professor of developmental psychology at Boston College, told the committee that “there’s no magic age at which children suddenly become independent” and that “parents are the best judges of what their children can and cannot do.”

Panelists also pointed to model language used in other states. Diane Redleaf, legal consultant to Let Grow and founder of the Family Defense Center, said 11 states have enacted similar protections and that Colorado’s “reasonable and prudent” formulation informed parts of HB 1873. Redleaf cited unanimous or bipartisan passage in several states and argued the bill addresses statutory vagueness by eliminating subjective phrases such as “proper care” while preserving the ability to intervene when there is an “obvious danger” that a reasonable, prudent parent would avoid.

Committee members asked about implementation and front‑line decision making. Chairwoman McNeil and others pressed witnesses on whether caseworkers and law enforcement would receive training or guidance to apply a “sufficient maturity” standard. Redleaf and other witnesses said the statutory change is intended to defer to parents unless there is clear evidence of serious danger, and they described pilot efforts and task forces in other states to develop implementation guidance and alternative community responses that do not automatically escalate to child welfare or criminal processes.

Members also discussed community alternatives and supports. Musak urged clearer notice to families about parallel processes — investigatory, administrative and potential registry placements — and called for better access to legal advice and early diversion or community referrals so families are not simultaneously facing long‑term registry consequences while receiving short‑term services.

Quotes from the hearing include:

• “We have to let kids be kids, but we also have to let parents be parents,” Lenore Skenazy, president and co‑founder of Let Grow. • “Parents are the best judges of what their children can and cannot do and the best judges of the safety of their neighborhood,” Peter Gray, research professor of developmental psychology, Boston College. • “She was labeled a child abuser and placed on the child abuse registry,” Mariel Musak, staff attorney, Youth Justice Project, Community Legal Services of Philadelphia, describing a client’s case. • “Let’s not criminalize good parenting,” Ethan Demme, CEO of Demme Learning, and a foster and adoptive parent.

What was not decided: The hearing was informational; committee members did not vote on HB 1873. Several members, including Representative Jamie Walsh, Representative John Schlegel and Representative Dave Zimmerman, expressed support for further work on the bill’s language and on training or implementation guidance for agencies and law enforcement.

Next steps: Committee members said they will continue to develop statutory language and consider implementation questions, including whether caseworkers and law enforcement need training or task‑force guidance to apply a “sufficient maturity” standard. No formal amendment or vote was recorded at the hearing.