Skip to content

Bills · 2019-2020 Regular Session

SB 728

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: termination of parental rights if a child has been placed outside the home for 15 of the last 22 months. (FE)

Children — Protection and services

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill expands the termination of parental rights (TPR) ground based on a

child's continuing need of protection or services.

Current law provides various grounds for an involuntary TPR, including

continuing need of protection or services, which must be established by proving 1)

that the child has been adjudged to be a child or juvenile in need of protection or

services (CHIPS) and placed, or continued in a placement, outside the child's home

pursuant to one or more orders of the court assigned to exercise jurisdiction under

the Children's Code (juvenile court); 2) that the agency responsible for the care of the

child has made a reasonable effort to provide the services ordered by the juvenile

court; and 3) that the child has been outside the home for a cumulative total period

of six months or longer, the parent has failed to meet the conditions established for

the safe return of the child to the home, and there is a substantial likelihood that the

parent will not meet those conditions by the time the child has been placed outside

the home for 15 of the last 22 months.

Under the bill, the involuntary TPR ground of continuing need of protection or

services may also be established by proving that a child has been placed outside of

his or her home on a continuing CHIPS order for 15 of the last 22 months and that

a review panel or court has not, in the 22 months prior to the filing of the TPR

petition, found that the agency failed to make reasonable efforts to achieve a

permanency goal. Under the bill, if the child is an Indian child, the petitioner must

also show that continued custody of the Indian child by the Indian child's parent or

Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the

Indian child and that active efforts have been made to prevent the breakup of the

Indian child's family but those efforts have proved to be unsuccessful.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Cowles (R) , Olsen (R) , Stroebel (R)

19 cosponsors

Dittrich (R) , Edming (R) , Felzkowski (R) , Horlacher (R) , James (R) , Katsma (R) , Kerkman (R) , Kulp (R) , Kurtz (R) , Magnafici (R) , Milroy (D) , Murphy (R) , Ramthun (R) , Snyder (R) , Thiesfeldt (R) , Tittl (R) , Tranel (R) , Tusler (R) , VanderMeer (R)

Full history

  1. Jan 29, 2020 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Stroebel, Olsen and Cowles; cosponsored by Representatives Snyder, Kulp, Dittrich, Felzkowski, Horlacher, James, Katsma, Kerkman, Kurtz, Magnafici, Milroy, Murphy, Ramthun, Tusler, Tranel, Thiesfeldt, VanderMeer, Tittl and Edming

  2. Jan 29, 2020 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Insurance, Financial Services, Government Oversight and Courts

  3. Feb 7, 2020 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Feb 18, 2020 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 1, 2020 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1