Legislation watch
- Home
- Create an account
- Advanced searches
- Scorecards
- Links
- About
2007 Senate Bill 669: Revise foster child procedures
Public Act 200 of 2008
Comments on this legislation Post new comment Text and Analysis Add to Watch List
Previous Next
- Introduced by Sen. Mark Jansen (R) on August 1, 2007, to require a court to consult in an age-appropriate manner with a child whose parents’ parental rights have been suspended, and who is the subject of a permanency hearing to determine whether this should be made permanent. Also, to require the initiation of proceedings to permanently terminate parental rights if a child has been a ward of the state for 15 of the last 22 months, unless the child has been in the care of relatives, or there is no compelling reason to terminate parental rights. The bill is part of a foster care legislative package consisting of Senate Bills 668 to 672.
- Referred to the Senate Families and Human Services Committee on August 1, 2007.
- Reported in the Senate on September 27, 2007, with the recommendation that the substitute (S-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the Senate on September 28, 2007, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details based on extensive testimony and "fine tuning." The main substance of the bill as previously described is not changed. The substitute passed by voice vote in the Senate on September 28, 2007.
- Referred to the Senate Families and Human Services Committee on August 1, 2007.
- Passed 38 to 0 in the Senate on October 3, 2007.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the House on October 3, 2007.
- Referred to the House Family and Childrens Services Committee on October 3, 2007.
- Reported in the House on March 19, 2008, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Substitute offered in the House on June 26, 2008, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that revises details but does not change the substance of the bill as previously described. The substitute passed by voice vote in the House on June 26, 2008.
- Amendment offered by Rep. Virgil Smith, Jr. (D) on June 26, 2008, to end the court jurisdiction of certain juvenile wards of the court once a guardian has been appointed and a review hearing or hearings have been held. The amendment passed by voice vote in the House on June 26, 2008.
- Referred to the House Family and Childrens Services Committee on October 3, 2007.
- Passed 108 to 0 in the House on June 26, 2008, to require a court to consult in an age-appropriate manner with a child whose parents’ parental rights have been suspended, and who is the subject of a permanency hearing to determine whether this should be made permanent. Also, to require the initiation of proceedings to permanently terminate parental rights if a child has been a ward of the state for 15 of the last 22 months, unless the child has been in the care of relatives, or there is no compelling reason to terminate parental rights. The bill is part of a foster care legislative package consisting of Senate Bills 668 to 672.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Received in the Senate on June 27, 2008.
- Passed 37 to 0 in the Senate on June 27, 2008.
Who Voted "Yes" and Who Voted "No" - Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on July 10, 2008.
Most Recent Comments
1) Child Rights First,before ,during and after by Anonymous Citizen on August 25, 2007Family Matters,a child trust in relatives,family without that continued connection children get lost in system . Social Services and Foster Care, Laws must reflect to call on all member of up to the 5thDegree relatives of a child before ,during after placement in foster home. What they don't know how to phone,write,or ask. Childs rights matter, if you were a child,who would you want to live with,the relatives you know,trust,or Foster home with 6 otherkids,even if its a relative that lives in Indiana,lansing,they would probably take in related child if they are even given a call or written notice. Do Social Foster System follow the
Laws,or even try to give notice?Childs Rights.
Judges should go by Laws should demand that a relative be notified first,so that if Parentrights are taken away,by force or by hearsay effects at least the child will be safer/or can be return to Parents easyer. Without all court battles,who gets kids,he/she said,false accusation,influnce control child love,Childs Rights come first not the Foster System Right. Anything to help Child Rights
Reply
is isatiable. Where will it end?
Reply
Introduced in the Senate on August 1, 2007, to require a court to consult in an age-appropriate manner with a child whose parents’ parental rights have been suspended, and who is the subject of a permanency hearing to determine whether this should be made permanent. Also, to require the initiation of proceedings to permanently terminate parental rights if a child has been a ward of the state for 15 of the last 22 months, unless the child has been in the care of relatives, or there is no compelling reason to terminate parental rights. The bill is part of a foster care legislative package consisting of Senate Bills 668 to 672
The vote was 38 in favor, 0 opposed and 0 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 403 at Senate Journal 101)
Click here to view bill details.
Reply
View Full Conversation
