State legislator pushes for historic public access to juvenile dependency courts statewide - San Jose Mercury News

State legislator pushes for historic public access to juvenile dependency courts statewide - San Jose Mercury News

Marking a dramatic shift in the scrutiny of how California protects its most vulnerable children, the courts overseeing the state's vast foster care system would be open to the public for the first time since 1961, under legislation now working its way through the state Assembly.
Proponents, including the state's most influential juvenile court judges, say the exposure will improve performance by allowing outsiders to view and evaluate the quality of proceedings in the courts that decide the fate of more than 58,000 children in foster care last year who were removed from their homes following allegations of abuse and neglect. The change would bring California in line with a growing number of states nationwide that have opened their courts and found no reason to return to confidentiality standards.
"In the 17 states that have prior experience in the open courts there has been no determination of harm to kids," said the bill's author, Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-West Hollywood. "There has, however, been even closer scrutiny, more accountability and more attention paid to the system."
The bill comes after the Mercury News spent months coaxing Northern California judges to allow a reporter into closed dependency hearings. The result, a 2008 series of stories following a year-long examination, revealed widespread dysfunction in the dependency courts -- including overwhelmed judges, and court-appointed lawyers who failed to meet even basic standards
Advertisement

of adequate representation. In some dependency courts, judges rule on more than 100 children's cases in a single day, and lawyers for parents and children are so harried they have only minutes to confer with clients in the hallway before life-altering hearings.
The stakes are high: Accused parents face a permanent loss of their children, while kids taken from their homes are often resigned to a revolving series of temporary homes and shelters.
Feuer said in light of the newspaper's findings, his bill would improve the quality of justice for children and parents, whose cases typically involve neglect due to poverty and substance abuse. "All the participants in the system, from judges to clerks to social workers to advocates will be more accountable," Feuer said.
Feuer's bill would make the courts "presumptively open," while maintaining judges' discretion to close certain cases if exposure posed a risk of harm. The bill would reverse current law, which presumes all cases are closed unless a judge rules to open them. The bill does not grant outsiders access to court files, and may include language requiring that courtroom observers keep children's identities confidential.
Although the legislation is in an early stage, critics are already lining up, including the influential social workers' union. Opponents maintain that traumatized children will be re-traumatized by exposure in court.
"Our legal system was created with the intent of protecting our most vulnerable, in this case our children," said Mary Gutierrez, spokeswoman for the Service Employees International Union, which represents social workers. "Opening the courtroom so the media and the public can hear about how a child was molested and abused does everything but protect the child."
The nonprofit California Youth Connection, which represents foster children, has not yet taken a position on the bill. Historically, they've had mixed feelings on the issue, said legislative director Chantel Johnson.
"We understand the intent is to provide better services for foster youth and make it a more open process and we love the intent to create transparency," Johnson said. "Where we've expressed concern is for some youth who feel that it's a violation of their confidentiality."
Assembly Bill 73, which will be discussed in Sacramento in the coming weeks, is the third legislative attempt to open dependency courts. Similar bills in 2000 and 2004 failed to move out of committees, despite amendments that would have narrowed the scope to a few pilot projects. Presiding Juvenile Court Judge Michael Nash -- whose Los Angeles dependency court oversees the cases of 25,000 children in the largest child welfare agency in the country -- described himself as one of the bill's most ardent supporters.
"There are lots of folks that say, 'no, we should keep these courts closed to protect kids,' when they are really only seeking to protect themselves," said Nash, ,who maintains an offer to have Los Angeles serve as a pilot program. "We live in what's supposed to be an open society -- and this is one big, fat exception to that open society, which I don't think is justified."
Meanwhile, the presiding dependency court judge in Santa Clara County, Katherine Lucero, takes a more cautious approach. Lucero -- who granted the Mercury News rare court access for several weeks in 2007 under an agreement that no children or parents' identities would be revealed -- said she needed convincing that a new law would include training for judges, and the ability of parties to easily request a closed hearing.
"It's possibly a good thing," Lucero said of the bill, "but I am very, very cautious in my support." That said, she noted that judges in other states "have overwhelmingly indicated that it has been a good thing for their community -- they believe they are still able to protect the privacy of the youth when necessary."
Contact Karen de Sá at 408-920-5781.