Child custody: supervised visitation.
The bill significantly impacts state law by enforcing stricter regulations on the qualifications of supervised visitation providers. It requires individuals to undergo training that covers critical subjects such as child abuse reporting laws and the developmental needs of children. As a result, only those who meet the defined criteria can provide supervised visitation services, potentially leading to enhanced safety for children during these visits. The requirement for a background check and proper training aims to protect children from being exposed to dangerous individuals and to ensure that those responsible for supervising visits are equipped to handle sensitive situations appropriately. Furthermore, the bill clarifies that local agencies will not be reimbursed for costs incurred as a result of this act when it creates or revises criminal definitions.
Assembly Bill 1165, authored by Bauer-Kahan, focuses on child custody and the requirements surrounding supervised visitation. This bill amends certain sections of the Family Code and the Health and Safety Code to streamline the registration and training processes for professional supervised visitation providers. Starting January 1, 2021, it mandates that these providers must register as trustline providers and complete a Live Scan criminal background check before offering supervised visitation services. Moreover, it specifies the type of training that must be undertaken by such providers, ensuring that they are adequately prepared to supervise visits involving children in cases where there may be domestic violence or child abuse concerns.
The sentiment surrounding AB 1165 has been largely positive within the legislative discussions, particularly from supporters who highlight the importance of child safety and professional qualifications. Advocates agree that the measures increase accountability and ensure that children are in safe and compliant environments during supervised visits. However, there are concerns raised by opponents regarding potential bureaucratic hurdles that could affect the availability of supervised visitation services. These critics argue that stringent regulations might limit the pool of potential providers, thus reducing accessibility for families in need of these services.
One notable point of contention revolves around the extent of the required training for supervised visitation providers. While supporters assert that comprehensive training is essential to adequately prepare providers, critics worry that excessive requirements may inadvertently decrease the availability of necessary services. Additionally, the bill's impact on local agency funding and the implications of no reimbursement for costs established in the act also sparked debate among lawmakers. The challenge remains to balance the necessity for heightened safety standards while ensuring families can access essential supervised visitation services.