HOUSE BILL REPORT

SB 6310

BYSenators Kiskaddon and Bailey

Revising certain procedures governing dependency proceedings.

House Committe on Human Services

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment.  (8)

      Signed by Representatives Brekke, Chair; Scott, Vice Chair; Anderson, Leonard, Moyer, H. Sommers, Sutherland and Winsley.

House Staff:Jean Wessman (786-7132)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES FEBRUARY 23, 1988

BACKGROUND:

The dependency statute provides that any person may file a dependency petition.  The termination statute contains no such language. This inconsistency leaves the question of who may file a termination petition to judicial interpretation.  Consequently, this question is decided on a case-by-case basis, which creates a barrier to private agencies and guardians ad litem in their effort to establish a solid permanent plan for a child in a timely fashion.

The summons to appear at the dependency hearing may be ordered published only "after due diligence" in attempting personal service or service by mail.  This section creates an unnecessary delay in those cases where it is clear that personal service cannot be accomplished.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  The Department of Social and Health Services and licensed child-placing agencies that are a party to the dependency proceedings may file a termination petition.

Notice by publication of a summons to appear at a dependency hearing, may proceed at the same time as personal service and service by mail, but only for good cause shown and only when there is reason to believe that personal service or service by mail will be unsuccessful.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The right to file a termination petition is limited to the Department of Social and Health Services and licensed child-placing agencies.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Senator Bill Kiskaddon, Prime Sponsor; Bailey deIongh, Office of the Public Defender, Seattle; Joyce Hopson and Lee Ann Miller,  Department of Social and Health Services; and Maureen McKaen, Washington Code Review Panel.

House Committee - Testified Against:      None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Clarity on who may file the termination petition is needed to expedite the process.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      None Presented.