hearing under SB 168. Information in this database is available to the Office of Licensing within
the Department of Human Services and to employees within the Department of Health, for
purpose of licensing child care providers.
SB 168 requires that persons with substantiated child abuse cases have an opportunity for
a hearing to have that finding reviewed. The bill requires that those with reports dates from
January 1, 1988 to December 31, 1993, have an opportunity for hearing before December 1,
1998. In June, DCFS mailed about 9,900 notices to persons in this group. About one - half of
these notices were returned as "undelivered." This means that either the person had moved or
refused to accept the notice letter. For those person who requested a hearing, these hearings are
being held and the December 1, 1998 deadline should be met.
In mid - October, DCFS plans to mail about 5,700 more notices for persons involved with
child abuse or neglect reports between January 1, 1994 and June 30, 1997. These person will
also have an opportunity for hearing before names are placed on the licensing database. For
those with reports on or after July 1, 1997, DCFS has been holding hearings on an on going
basis. Very few of the notices in this group are "undelivered." For these hearings, a person must
request a hearing within 30 days and DCFS must either schedule a hearing or amend the record
within 30 days. There is no specific deadline by when a hearing must be held.
Representative Stephens said that she keeps hearing about people who are on a database,
and don't know about it. Mr. Howe replied that the only way a person can be on the Licensing
database is to: (1) be substantiated by DCFS as having committed child abuse or neglect; and (2)
have an opportunity for a hearing. Representative Haymond said that if a person does not receive
a notice letter, for whatever reason, his or her name is not placed on the Licensing database.
Rep. Stephens noted that it is possible for a person to be listed on the SAFE database without
knowing.
b. Review of Options for Possible Changes to SB 168 _ Mr. Chet Loftis, Associate General Counsel, distributed to the panel a chart outlining various issues, background, and
options concerning the implementation of SB 168.
The first issue involves persons who have been substantiated by DCFS as having
committed child abuse or neglect whose notice letters are returned as "undelivered." SB 168
provides that a hearing must be held on these cases before June 30, 1999 before these names can
be placed on the Licensing database. As noted earlier, about one - half of the notices for the time
frame between January 1, 1988 and December 31, 1993 were returned as "undelivered."
Senator Wharton said that even those these notices were not delivered, that the records
should not be destroyed. The state should not protect the perpetrator. What is the problem with
simply holding the letter? Mr. Loftis said that SB 168 requires that these hearings be held before
June 30, 1999. Senator Wharton said that he does not think that the Legislature intended to
create a loophole.
Rep. Stephens asked if DCFS knows why these letters are not delivered. Carol Verdoia,
Office of the Attorney General, said that it is her understanding that some persons are refusing to
accept delivery of the notice letter.
Senator Hillyard said that it is difficult to draft a bill that covers every possible
contingency. But the Legislature should ensure due process for everyone.
MOTION: Rep. Barth moved that the names of persons whose notice letters are returned to DCFS as "undelivered" be kept in an abeyance file in the Licensing database. Should that
person request licensing an opportunity for hearing would be given to that person before a
licensing decision is made.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Loftis reviewed with the panel the next implementation issue deals with minor
perpetrators and whether information on the Licensing database should follow that minor into
adulthood.
Sen. Hillyard commented that person who is substantiated as a minor, but the case is an
isolated instance, and has since received treatment, would be denied a license as an adoptive
parent many years later after they have become an adult. He is aware of a case where this
actually happened.
In addition, adoption agencies have been told by DCFS that if they approve as an
adoptive parent a person with a substantiated child abuse case, they the agency will loose its
license.
MOTION: Rep. Barth moved that the panel recommend that a person who, as a minor, has a substantiated child abuse or neglect case, be given an opportunity to request removal under
standards similar to those that apply to the sealing of a juvenile's criminal record.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Senator Hillyard moved that the panel receive public input on this issue.
The substitute motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Loftis reviewed with the panel the next implementation issue _ whether a finding of
child abuse or neglect may be substantiated based on the hearsay statement of a child. Current
law provides for a child's statement, but not a hearsay statement, to be the sole basis for DCFS
making a substantiated finding of child abuse or neglect. The issue is whether the child should
be required to come to a hearing under SB 168 to testify.
Ms. Carol Verdoia told the panel that the issue is whether the abuse can be substantiated
at the SB 168 hearing based on the child's hearsay statement alone. There is case law that
provides that a judge may not rule based on a child's hearsay statement alone.
Mr. Scott Clark, Chair, Board of Child and Family Services, said that the issue is whether
an uncorroborated statement of a child alone is sufficient to substantiated. Are there instances
when this should be done? What about statements of very young children? He said that there are
studies which show that young children are susceptible to false beliefs and memories and that an
interviewer should be cautious and avoid making suggestions. He recommended that the panel
obtain copies of these studies.
Mr. Adam Troop, Deputy Juvenile Court Administrator, said that CPS investigators are
trained to interview children and to avoid making suggestions and tainting the interview process.
It would be unfortunate to make rules that are more strict for CPS workers than are applied in
other types of investigations. If the goal is to provide due process, then the law should allow for
the hearsay statement and for challenges to that statement. The child should not be required to
come and testify in person in an administrative hearing without the help of counsel and support
persons. There are processes now in place to prevent tainted evidence. There are protections for
persons who are accused of abuse. We don't need the same protections granted in criminal court
in an administrative hearing.
Mr. Rob Parrish, Office of the Attorney General, said that there are many studies in the
area of child memory. The clear majority of studies show that children generally have accurate
memories.
Mr. Loftis then summarized the remaining issues for the panel's consideration: (1)
removal of information from the SAFE database; (2) substantiated offenses to be included in the
Licensing database; and (3) limiting access to the Licensing database.
Rep. Haymond suggested that the panel receive public comment on these issues at its
next meeting. Rep. Barth said that specific persons should be asked to respond and that the panel
should have written responses in advance of the meeting.
The panel decided to meeting again on October 23, 1998.
4. Other Business
a. Rep. Stephens distributed to the panel background information regarding a child who is in the custody of the Division of Child and Family Services. She asked that the panel
members review this information for possible review.
b. Senator Hillyard noted that the panel has been request by Robin Arnold Williams, Executive Director, Department of Human Services, to review the case of a Dr. David Watson.
Senator Hillyard noted that additional information should be collected before a decision is made.
6. Adjournment
MOTION: Rep. Barth moved to adjourn the meeting at 11:10 a.m. The motion passed unanimously.