Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Baby Safety Device topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee pauses baby safety-device bill after senators raise parental-rights concerns
Summary
Lawmakers debated whether placing an infant in a state-approved baby safety device should automatically terminate parental rights, with Attorney General's staff saying the original law intended relinquishment and senators proposing a 30-day reclaim window; the bill was laid on the table subject to call for further drafting.
Chairman Wiggins opened debate on House Bill 1616, a committee substitute intended to clarify how the state's baby safety-device law affects termination of parental rights (TPR). "The intent when the law was passed was that ... that baby becomes in the CPS" when left in the device, Wiggins said as he introduced the bill and the proposed clarifications.
Senator Hobson told the committee she worried the draft was too final: "If you place it in the baby box shortly after birth ... I think about a woman who may have postpartum depression ... and that has a regret 48, 72 hours, 3, 4 days later and saying, I love this child. I wanna keep this child. And ... according to this language ... there's no chance for them to ever have that relationship with their child again." The senator pressed whether termination must proceed via chancery or youth court and whether a short grace period should be allowed.
Gregory Austin, deputy director of the Attorney General's Office policy division, said the original legislative intent was that placing an infant in a device constitutes relinquishment of parental rights and that the bill aims to clarify that practice. "Once a parent takes that step to drive to a device and put that baby in the device that they are terminating their parental rights to the child," Austin said, noting the devices are anonymous and allowing a simple return would raise logistical and evidentiary complications such as DNA verification.
Committee members differed on remedies. Senator Simmons, who said he had represented a client suffering mental-health and substance-use issues, urged preserving judicial notice and due process in TPR proceedings and proposed deleting the subsection that would make rights automatically terminate on surrender. Senator Hobson offered a substitute amendment to create a 30-day window for a parent to provide proof (DNA or hospital records) to reclaim a child; she asked staff to help refine language if the committee accepted the amendment.
After extended questioning about how agencies look for missing children and how fathers would be notified when a child is left anonymously, the committee voted to lay the bill on the table subject to call so members and staff could work on the drafting and reconcile concerns raised in the hearing. The committee recessed at 02:55.
The committee did not take a final vote on the bill; the matter will return to committee work so sponsors and the Attorney General's Office can reconcile competing concerns about anonymity, evidence, and due-process protections.
