Postadoption contact: siblings of dependent children or wards.
Summary
Existing law provides that a minor may be adjudged a dependent child or a ward of the juvenile court under specified circumstances. Existing law authorizes the court to place a minor who has been removed from the custody of his or her parent or guardian in foster care, among other placements. Existing law allows, in an adoption proceeding, for continuing contact between the birth relatives and a child if a postadoption contact agreement is entered into voluntarily and is in the best interests of the child at the time the adoption petition is granted. Existing law requires, if parental rights are terminated and the court orders a dependent child or ward to be placed for adoption, the county adoption agency or the State Department of Social Services to take specified steps, with exceptions, to facilitate ongoing sibling contact, including the encouragement of prospective adoptive parents to make a plan for facilitating postadoptive contact, as specified. This bill would instead require the county placing agency, as part of the above steps, to the extent practicable, to convene a meeting with the child, the sibling or siblings of the child, the prospective adoptive parent or parents, and a facilitator for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement. The bill would provide that the county placing agency is not required to convene a meeting to decide whether to voluntarily execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement if specified circumstances occur. The bill would authorize the child to petition the court for an order requiring the county placing agency to convene a meeting to decide whether to voluntarily execute a postadoption sibling contact agreement. The bill would provide that the meeting is not required to occur if the court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a postadoption sibling contact agreement or a meeting for the purpose of deciding whether to voluntarily execute such an agreement is contrary to the safety and well-being of the child and notes the determination in the court order. By requiring new duties on a county placing agency relating to meetings on postadoption sibling contact agreements, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the court, at least every 6 months, to review the status of a dependent child for whom the court has ordered parental rights terminated and who has been ordered placed for adoption. This bill would require the court to inquire into the status of the development of a voluntary postadoption sibling contact agreement at the time of the first review hearing conducted pursuant to the above-described provision. Existing law requires a juvenile court, in the case of a minor declared a ward and ordered to be placed in foster care, and where the minor has continuing involvement with his or her parents or legal guardians, to include in its order placing the minor in a permanent placement a specification of the nature and frequency of visiting arrangements with the parents or legal guardians. This bill would expand this provision to also apply to visiting arrangements with siblings of the minor. This bill would also make conforming changes to related provisions. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2016
Committee Review
Aug 2016
Senate Passage
Jun 2016
Assembly Passage
Aug 2016
Signed into Law
Sep 2016
Introduced Feb 16, 2016
Signed Sep 27, 2016
Floor votes · Senate Jun 1, 2016 · Assembly Aug 18, 2016
How they voted
28–4
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 33
Jun 1, 2016
D
Democratic23
95% Yea
R
Republican10
60% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
29
Key actions
9
Committee
11
Amendments
2
Sep 27, 2016
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 24, 2016
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Aug 19, 2016
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 18, 2016
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (69-0-2)
assembly
Aug 12, 2016
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 20. Noes 0.) (August 11).
lower
Aug 1, 2016
Committee
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 29, 2016
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 22, 2016
Committee
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S.
lower
Jun 21, 2016
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 21).
lower
Jun 9, 2016
Committee
Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HUM. S.
lower
Jun 1, 2016
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (28-4-1)
senate
May 31, 2016
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
May 27, 2016
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 4002.) (May 27).
upper
Apr 19, 2016
Committee
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 18, 2016
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 3519.) (April 12).
upper
Feb 25, 2016
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Feb 16, 2016
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 8 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1060
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1060. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline