Co Atty's Office: Generally, HB 409 is impossible to comply with and creates largely insurmountable burdens to keep our children safe. HB 409 seeks to substantially heighten the burden of proof for removal of children from probable cause to clear and convincing evidence. Currently, clear and convincing evidence is the burden of proof for termination of parental rights in non-ICWA cases. Raising the burden for removal as this bill proposes would leave a significant number of our abused and neglected children at substantial risk of harm without the protection of the state. It essentially requires a high burden of proof and a child to already be subjected to clear abuse and neglect before state intervention when the intention of child protection is to prevent abuse and neglect. We, the state, don’t wait for each and every child to be abused, neglected or abandoned first before a child can obtain protection.
HB 409 also requires an additional emergency removal hearing on top of the initial required hearings already statutorily provided for which is redundant and unnecessary. HB 409 also requires already overburdened and overworked social workers to somehow write an affidavit at the time of an emergency removal, rather than the current two-day timeframe, which is not feasible.
Every proposed change in HB 409 goes against the actual protection of our children and, instead, serves only the interests of parents and insulating perpetrated abuse and neglect.
Co Atty's Office: Generally, HB 409 is impossible to comply with and creates largely insurmountable burdens to keep our children safe. HB 409 seeks to substantially heighten the burden of proof for removal of children from probable cause to clear and convincing evidence. Currently, clear and convincing evidence is the burden of proof for termination of parental rights in non-ICWA cases. Raising the burden for removal as this bill proposes would leave a significant number of our abused and neglected children at substantial risk of harm without the protection of the state. It essentially requires a high burden of proof and a child to already be subjected to clear abuse and neglect before state intervention when the intention of child protection is to prevent abuse and neglect. We, the state, don’t wait for each and every child to be abused, neglected or abandoned first before a child can obtain protection.
ReplyDeleteHB 409 also requires an additional emergency removal hearing on top of the initial required hearings already statutorily provided for which is redundant and unnecessary. HB 409 also requires already overburdened and overworked social workers to somehow write an affidavit at the time of an emergency removal, rather than the current two-day timeframe, which is not feasible.
Every proposed change in HB 409 goes against the actual protection of our children and, instead, serves only the interests of parents and insulating perpetrated abuse and neglect.