Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Behavioral Health Legal Protections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate bill modeled on Jacob’s Law aims to protect parents seeking inpatient treatment for children with severe behavioral health needs
Summary
SB372 would add statutory protections so parents are not automatically found to have abused or neglected a child solely because they sought inpatient behavioral health treatment or because a child posed safety risks to others in the household.
Sen. John Steinbeck introduced Senate Bill 372, a measure inspired by Arizona’s “Jacob’s Law,” intended to protect parents and guardians who seek professional mental‑health care for children with significant behavioral health needs.
Steinbeck and family law attorney Kim Surratt told the committee that Nevada law lacks clear protections for parents who admit or seek inpatient treatment for children whose psychiatric or behavioral disorders pose risks to the family. Surratt, who has handled appeals and family cases involving such children, described situations in which parents pursuing treatment were later accused of neglect because the child was not kept at home or because facilities discharged children who proved too difficult to treat.
Two parents, Kimberly and Rain Alexander, described their own experience: after repeated assaults by their child on staff and other patients at multiple residential facilities, they said Child Protective Services opened allegations of abandonment when they insisted the child was unsafe to discharge into the home. They urged the committee to adopt clear protections so families are not penalized for seeking inpatient care when the child’s needs exceed the family’s ability to provide safe supervision.
Kim Surratt and the sponsor said SB372 would limit findings of abuse or neglect when parents are actively seeking clinically appropriate treatment or when they take a child home temporarily while awaiting placement, and would ensure caseworkers and courts consider the specialized clinical needs rather than automatically treating placement decisions as neglect.
Clark County counsel Joanna Jacob testified she supported the bill’s premise and asked that the Legislature continue work on implementation details and wraparound services; she did not press opposition but requested continued coordination to fund supports to keep families intact when appropriate.
Ending note: the hearing did not result in a committee vote; proponents asked for continued legislative work and potential interim study to address resource gaps for high‑needs children.
