Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Garretts Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DCFS presents year‑to‑date Garrett’s Law data showing rising reports and high substantiation rates
Summary
Director Martin told the Senate Children and Youth Committee that reports under Garrett’s Law have steadily increased since the law’s adoption, with marijuana the most-cited substance and a 94% substantiation rate in the latest reporting year; about 14% of newborns substantiated under the law were removed from mothers' custody.
Director Martin, director of the Division of Children and Family Services, presented the annual Garrett’s Law report to the Senate Children and Youth Committee, summarizing the statute’s current scope and the agency’s response.
Martin said Garrett’s Law, as currently defined, applies when a newborn’s bodily fluids test positive for an illegal substance attributable to the mother’s prenatal use. She told the committee that accepted reports for investigation have risen steadily since the law’s inception and that the latest state fiscal‑year figures show a year‑over‑year increase.
The report breaks down the substances cited: marijuana (THC/cannabis) was recorded in about 70% of Garrett’s Law reports; amphetamines/methamphetamine accounted for roughly 27%; opioids about 11%; benzodiazepines about 8%; and cocaine about 4%. On newborn health outcomes, Martin said 76% of newborns reportedly exposed in utero had no reported health problems; about 13% required NICU care; roughly 11% experienced respiratory distress or related problems; and about 6% exhibited drug‑related withdrawal symptoms.
Martin also presented response metrics: a 94% substantiation rate for Garrett’s Law reports and a 95% rate at which DCFS opened a case after substantiation. She said those high substantiation numbers reflect the relative ease of proof when a positive maternal or neonatal drug screen is available, while noting false positives account for a portion of unsubstantiated reports after confirmatory testing.
On outcomes, Martin told the committee that just over 14% of newborns substantiated under Garrett’s Law were removed from mothers’ custody in the reported year and entered foster care; of those removed, roughly one‑third were returned home or placed with relatives within 12 months (a decline from the prior year’s roughly 37% return/relative‑placement rate).
Committee members asked whether the legislature should change Garrett’s Law. Martin recommended no change to the statutory definition at present but highlighted an implementation gap: hospitals and mandatory reporters do not uniformly test or classify marijuana use at birth, and recent state law changes addressing lawful marijuana use affect whether an instance is reported under Garrett’s Law or handled under the newer CARL/CARLA policy for safe‑care planning.
The chair concluded the presentation and thanked Martin for the report; committee members indicated they would follow up on specific data‑breakdown requests.
The committee requested additional tabulations (for example, totals by age group and a review of reporting practices) to help interpret observed age distributions and allegation‑counts.
