Judge’s ‘day court’ model would expand to youth with FASD, NAS under SB140

Senate Bill 140, presented May 9 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee, would add youth with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) to specialty treatment courts modeled on an existing “day court” for youth on the autism spectrum.

Senator James Orenshall introduced the bill and turned the presentation to Judge Sonnehie Bailey, who described the DAA (Detention Alternatives for Autistic Youth) Court in the Eighth Judicial District. "We became the first state in the nation to actually have a diversionary court, and ... we're actually the only state that recognizes a diversionary court for youth on the spectrum," Judge Bailey told the committee, and she said the program has graduated its 105th participant and maintains a roughly 90 percent success rate.

Judge Bailey said SB140 would expand the court’s eligibility to include children affected by FASD and NAS, both of which she and witnesses described as neurodevelopmental conditions that can produce impulsivity, poor social skills and difficulties with learning and executive function. Bailey told lawmakers that many affected youth are undiagnosed: "A recent study found that youth in the juvenile justice system are 40 times more likely to have FASD than the general population, and tragically, 95 percent of those are undiagnosed," she said. She also said a neuropsychological evaluation in Clark County can have an 18-month waiting list at the Ackerman Center and cost "over $7,500," with Medicaid covering only about "$750" of that testing.

Committee members asked about program details. Judge Bailey said the day-court model typically runs from six months to more than a year when the program is a term of probation, and that youth enter the juvenile system through existing arrest and referral pathways. The court's services include targeted behavioral intervention, coordination of applied behavior analysis (ABA) services, legal-aid assistance for Individualized Education Program (IEP) issues, sports and social inclusion programs, and parent training. Bailey said evaluations are conducted by a panel of clinicians and that clinicians collect extensive medical and developmental histories to support diagnoses.

Supporters who testified included Paloma Guerrero of the Clark County Public Defender’s Office, Jonathan Norman of the Nevada Coalition of Legal Service Providers, Carissa Pierce of the Children’s Advocacy Alliance, and Bridget Duffy of the Clark County District Attorney’s Office (juvenile division). Testimony emphasized the court’s role in connecting children and families to services, judicial oversight to ensure follow-through and the potential to reduce recidivism: "Any investment we can make into therapeutic programs now will save our state money in the long run and is smart on crime legislation that we can all support," Paloma Guerrero said.

No speakers registered opposition. Multiple community providers and court administrators described the measure as an extension of an existing specialty-court model and said formal recognition would allow the court and partners to seek grants and funding through the Administrative Office of the Courts.

The committee closed testimony on SB140 with presenters asking for the committee's support; no floor vote on the bill was recorded during the hearing.