Tennessee House Bill HB1395

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/31/23
• Refer: 2/2/23

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 37, relative to foster care.

Impact

If enacted, this bill would significantly impact existing statutes related to the financial support for foster care in Tennessee. By instituting a supplementary payment for car insurance, the state would not only alleviate some of the financial burden on foster parents but also encourage more families to consider fostering older children. This change could potentially lead to increased placement options for youth in foster care, which is crucial given the challenges faced by older children in the system. Additionally, it establishes a precedent for future legislative actions aimed at enhancing the financial stability and support for foster care families.

Summary

House Bill 1395 is legislation aimed at amending the Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically Title 37, which pertains to foster care. The bill introduces a financial provision to support foster parents who care for children aged fifteen years or older. In addition to the existing payments received for providing foster care, the bill mandates that the department responsible for foster care must provide a supplement that covers the actual costs incurred by these foster parents for car insurance associated with the foster child. The implementation of this bill reflects a recognition of the additional financial responsibilities that come with caring for older foster children, particularly in regards to transport and mobility needs.

Contention

The discussion surrounding HB1395 might involve various points of contention, notably whether the state can adequately fund this new provision without impacting other areas of the foster care budget. Advocates for foster care reform may argue that this bill is a step in the right direction, emphasizing the necessity of financial support for foster parents to ensure that foster children receive the care they need. Conversely, critics could raise concerns about the fiscal implications of adding additional costs to an already strained welfare system, questioning the accountability measures in place to ensure that funds are used appropriately.