House committee advances bill tightening neglect standard, adds police-DCF referral line and delays effective date to Jan. 1, 2026

A House committee on Tuesday advanced House Bill 2132 after adopting multiple amendments that change the statutory definition of neglect, revise police protective-custody rules and require DCF to provide a dedicated electronic referral mechanism for law enforcement.

Madam Chair of the committee said she had spent days negotiating with stakeholders and introduced three amendments that the committee adopted. The changes replace the bill's original language using "imminent" or "likelihood of harm" with a standard described in the bill and amendments as "presenting a substantial risk of serious harm." The committee also adopted language that makes certain statutory actions prospective and requires DCF to update and submit policies before the law takes effect.

The bill matters because it alters when a child may be removed from their home, what facts may be used in court petitions, and how law enforcement coordinates with child-welfare workers. Proponents said changes were made in response to concerns from district attorneys, law enforcement and DCF about enforceability and implementation timelines.

The committee's adopted changes included:

- Neglect definition: Replacing references to "imminent" or "likelihood of harm" with "presenting a substantial risk of serious harm," and adding a separate subsection that makes clear the cumulative effects of a pattern of conduct, behavior or inaction by a parent, guardian or other caregiver may constitute neglect. Committee counsel Jesse said the amendment "will delete all references to imminent harm and make them serious harm."

- Factors that cannot be the sole basis for removal: The amendments instruct that facts in a petition seeking a child's removal "shall not be based solely on" listed factors. The committee added language clarifying that certain listed factors co-occurring with "community or family poverty" also may not, by themselves, form the basis for removal. Committee counsel explained that change was intended to prevent removal where poverty is the foundational factor.

- Specific factor changes: The committee removed prenatal drug or alcohol exposure and replaced a prior reference to "substance abuse" with the statutory term "non-felony drug crime without harm," after counsel noted the latter is defined in state law.

- Parent consultation and timing: The bill as amended changes a requirement that parents "shall" have an opportunity to consult counsel before agreeing to proposed services into a permissive "may" provision. The amendments also postpone parts of the statute so certain provisions apply only to proceedings filed on or after Jan. 1, 2026, and require the secretary to update related DCF policies and submit them to the Joint Committee on Child Welfare System Oversight on or before Jan. 1, 2026 (the committee's substitute bill will contain technical revisions to align dates and language).

- Police protective custody and alternative options: The committee reworked the police protective-custody section so that two categories under which officers may take a child into custody are permissive ("may"), and the statute now directs officers to explore other options to separate a child from a source of harm before removal. The bill adds a new requirement that the secretary provide an electronic means for law enforcement to refer a child to DCF and respond within 24 hours whether to initiate an investigation; Deputy Secretary Tanya Keyes said she supported the concept as an operational tool to reduce unnecessary removals.

During debate, several lawmakers and stakeholders said they favored changing "imminent" because that word, commonly used in criminal law, posed problems for civil child-welfare proceedings. The chair noted district attorneys were concerned with the term "imminent," and said the adopted compromise "went a little bit higher standard than harm, lower standard than imminent, and so serious is kind of where we ended up." Jesse told the committee that courts will refer to Black's Law Dictionary if needed to interpret "serious".

Ed Klump, who represented law enforcement interests during negotiations, urged consistency across related statutory provisions, saying "if you're gonna change it in one place, I think you should change it in both." Deputy Secretary Keyes described the proposed DCF referral line as a way for officers to get a DCF response within 24 hours and avoid on-the-spot removals when follow-up might resolve the safety concern.

Several members asked for procedural clarifications and small technical cleanups; the sponsor told the committee the reviser would prepare a substitute bill to reflect the adopted amendments and make technical edits.

Votes at the committee included voice approvals on each amendment and a final voice vote to pass HB 2132 as amended to the floor. Representative Johnson moved that the bill be passed out as amended and that the reviser prepare a substitute bill with discretion for technical changes; Representative Owsley seconded, and the motion carried by voice vote.

The measure as amended alters thresholds and processes used by courts, law enforcement and child-welfare staff when determining removals; it delays some changes to Jan. 1, 2026, to allow agencies time to update policies and trainings. The committee also instructed the reviser to incorporate the adopted edits into a single substitute bill for the full House to consider.

Sources: Committee debate and staff explanations recorded during the committee hearing; direct statements by committee counsel Jesse, Deputy Secretary Tanya Keyes and law enforcement representative Ed Klump recorded in the committee transcript.