Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the LC266 Family Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Work group proposes narrowing 'threatened harm' and limiting third‑party investigations in LC 266
Summary
Daniel Mulkey presented the Family Justice Work Group’s recommendations in LC 266, proposing to tighten Oregon’s 'threatened harm' standard to imminent and severe harm, raise substantiation standards to align with service consequences, narrow adult third‑party investigative jurisdiction to caregiving nexus, and allow alternative/differential responses for minors.
Daniel Mulkey, chief of staff for Representative Anessa Hartman, told the committee that the Family Justice and Child Welfare Reform Work Group reviewed Oregon’s child‑welfare practices and identified four interrelated policy changes in Legislative Concept 266.
Mulkey said Oregon records substantially higher referral and screening rates than the national average and highlighted what the work group describes as an ‘‘overextension’’ of CPS investigative authority since Senate Bill 155 in 2021. He said threatened‑harm findings are common, often vague, and disproportionately overturned in internal review; the work group proposes requiring ‘‘imminent and severe harm’’ to reduce subjectivity.
The LC 266 package would also seek to match the evidentiary standard for substantiation with the consequences that follow (Mulkey said the proposal would raise the state standard toward preponderance), narrow CPS jurisdiction for adult third‑party investigations to those with a caregiving nexus to a child, and provide an alternative/differential response for minors who exhibit harmful behavior so treatment rather than labeling is prioritized.
Mulkey framed the changes as intended to reduce duplicative investigations, direct scarce CPS resources to cases where intervention can be effective, and curb collateral harms — such as long‑term employment barriers created by founded dispositions that do not lead to services.
Committee members asked about administrative‑rule review, historical founded/unfounded rates since SB 155, and how timelines align with law‑enforcement investigations; Mulkey said some of those questions were beyond the work group’s scope but that the group had relied on stakeholder input and prior HB 4086 committee work.
The work group recommended statutory language to add ‘‘imminent’’ and ‘‘severe’’ to threatened‑harm criteria, to require a caregiving nexus for adult investigations, and to allow differential response for minors, with the stated goals of aligning Oregon with national practices and reducing harm from overly broad substantiation.
