►
From YouTube: 3/8/2021 - Senate Committee on Judiciary
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
A
And
I
am
here:
could
the
record
also,
please
reflect
the
presence
of
pat
geinan,
our
fantastic
committee
policy
analyst
and
note
that
nick
anthony
our
committee
council
is
unable
to
make
it
today
because
he
is
still
and
again
working
on
all
of
those
bills
that
we
so
desperately
want
to
introduce
this
session,
and
with
that
I
think
we
are
ready
to
move
on
to
our
only
bill
presentation
for
today,
which
is
sb
143
for
those
of
you
who
are
joining
us
over
the
internet.
A
If
you
wish
to
speak
on
the
bill,
please
navigate
to
the
committee
website
to
this
particular
meeting
for
march
8th.
There
is
a
button
there.
You
can
click
on
that
says
participate
you
will
have
to
enter
in
your
name,
your
phone
number
and
the
position
that
you
wish
to
testify
in
and
once
you
do
that
you
will
be
given
the
phone
number
to
call
in,
and
I
will
give
a
cue
when
it
is
time
for
the
public
to
speak.
A
I
also
see
that
senator
pickard
has
joined
us
if
the
secretary
please
reflect
that
on
the
rule,
and
we
are
very
lucky
today
to
be
joined
not
only
by
our
own
senator
harris
and
senator
hansen,
but
assemblywomanhansen.
It
is
a
delight
to
have
you
here
in
the
senate
judiciary.
We
thank
you
for
joining
us,
and
I
know
that
there
are
a
few
other
folks,
along
with
senator
harris
to
present
the
bill,
but
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
her
to
introduce
them
to
us
and
give
us
the
rundown
senator
harris.
C
Good
afternoon,
thank
you,
chair
scheible
and
members
of
the
judiciary
committee.
I
am
senator
dallas
harris
representing
district
11
in
clark
county.
I
hope
you
all
aren't
sick
of
me.
Yet
I
I
anticipate
I'll,
have
a
few
more
thank
you.
Senator
hansen,
a
few
more
bills
to
present
in
front
of
the
committee,
so
I
I
appreciate
your
indulgence.
C
First,
I
want
to
thank
the
vigorous
working
group.
That's
collaborated
on
this
bill
and
the
active
participation
of
director,
russ
armstrong
and
child
protective
service
directors
from
around
the
state
and
the
district
attorney's
association
and
representatives
of
law
enforcement.
We've
made
several
changes
to
the
bill
based
upon
their
feedback.
C
Fundamentally,
I'm
bringing
this
bill
because
the
impact
of
nevada's,
vague
neglect,
statutes
lessens
parents,
confidence,
especially
poor
and
minority
parents,
and
their
ability
to
allow
children
to
be
independent
through
outdoor
activities
or
being
home
alone.
It
also
diverts
the
precious
resources
of
multiple
systems
for
more
acute
from
more
acute
needs
to
bring
about
the
positive
change.
The
positive
effects
of
this
bill
will
take
time.
C
D
Good
afternoon,
thank
you
and
for
the
record,
I'm
assemblywoman
alexis
hansen,
district
32
and
thank
you,
chair,
scheible
and
senate
judiciary
for
this
opportunity
to
hear
sb
143
the
reasonable
childhood
independence
bill.
I'm
honored
to
be
co-sponsoring
this
legislation
and
presenting
with
senator
harris
and
appreciate
all
the
conversations
in
the
suggested
amending
language
from
the
various
stakeholders.
D
First
and
foremost,
though,
the
intent
of
this
bill
is
not
to
make
the
important
work
of
law
enforcement,
child
protective
agencies
and
prosecutors
more
difficult.
We
appreciate
the
difficult
work
they
attend
to
in
our
state
on
a
regular
basis.
We
are
here
today
to
talk
about
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum,
responsible
parents
and
the
sometimes
unnecessary
hindrance
or
stigma
that
they
can
be
caught
up
initially
in
the
broad
scope
of
nevada
neglect
statute.
D
We
hope,
with
this
legislation
to
assure
responsible
parents
that
they
can
use
their
reasonable
judgment
to
determine
if
their
children
are
capable
of
independently
engaging
in
certain
childhood
independence.
Many
of
you
know
that
senator
harris
and
I
were
raised
by
single
moms
and
I
worried
that
if
they
were
raising
us
today,
they
might
be
caught
up
caught
up
in
the
broad
net
of
our
current
law.
D
My
mother's
circumstances
were
such
that
she
allowed
me
and
sometimes
had
no
other
choice
than
to
allow
for
me
to
experience
reasonable
childhood
independence,
and
I
benefited
from
that
and
in
turn
my
eight
grown.
Very
successful
children
are
products
of
growing
up
with
the
same
kind
of
confidence
that
I
was
allowed
to
develop,
but
today
many
parents
and
legislators
do
not
know
what
is
allowable
by
law
for
their
children
to
engage
in
as
independent
activities.
D
Unfortunately,
a
culture
of
fear
has
begun
to
grip
many
parents
in
our
communities
about
what
is
okay,
what
is
neglect
in
the
eyes
of
the
law
or
in
the
eyes
of
my
neighbor?
I
see
this
legislation
as
enabling
good
parents
to
be
given
the
autonomy
to
make
decisions
about
their
child's
independence
within
reasonable
guidelines
that
are
codified
in
statute.
D
D
C
Thank
you
so
much
assemblywoman
hanson.
It
cannot
be
stated
enough.
This
bill
is
not
attempting
to
discourage
community
members
from
calling
law
enforcement
to
report
cases
of
suspected
abuse
and
neglect.
That
is
an
important
part
of
our
system,
and
we
need
our
community
members
to
be
the
eyes
and
ears.
C
C
Currently
the
may
term
in
the
statute
standing
alone
is
too
vague,
allowing
any
case
to
be
investigated,
resulting
in
trauma
to
the
child
and
parent.
This
section
also
indicates
that
a
person
is
not
guilty
of
a
child
neglect
violation
solely
because
that
person
allows
a
child
to
engage
in
independent
activities.
C
So
long
as
that
person
has
reasonable
cause
to
believe
that
such
child
is
of
sufficient
maturity,
physical
condition
and
mental
ability
to
avoid
substantial
and
foreseeable
risk
of
physical
harm.
When
engaging
in
such
activities
or
given
such
permission,
it
then
goes
on
to
list
activities
such
as
traveling
to
and
from
school
engaging
in
outdoor
play
remaining
at
home,
unintended
unattended
or
engaging
in
a
similar
independent
activity
alone
or
with
other
children.
C
It
amends
nrs
432b.140
to
state
that
negligent
treatment
of
a
child
occurs
if
a
child
is
without
necessary
care,
control
or
supervision,
including
without
limitation,
sustenance,
education,
shelter,
medical
medical
care
or
other
care
necessary
for
the
well-being
of
the
child
as
a
result
of
the
neglect
or
refusal
of
the
person
to
provide
the
necessary
care
control.
When
able
to
do
so.
C
Parents
who
know
their
children
best
will
not
have
to
fear
a
child
neglect
investigation
because
they're
allowed
because
they
allowed
their
kids
to
play
in
the
neighborhood,
try
as
they
might
a
knock
up
the
door
from
a
police
officer
or
a
child.
Protective
worker
is
still
traumatizing
for
a
child
and
for
the
parent
or
caregiver
too.
C
C
C
You
may
hear
from
several
respected
stakeholders
about
concerns
and
objectives
related
to
these
changes,
including
difficulties
in
prosecuting
cases
which
already
have
great
due
process
involved
before
a
child
is
removed
from
the
home.
C
We've
considered
these
issues
and
for
one
have
all
of
the
confidence
in
the
world
that
prosecutors
can
protect
children
in
all
necessary
cases
and
for
two,
as
I've
already
stated,
removal
is
not
necessarily
the
issue
here.
Casting
a
cloud
on
parents
for
actions
they
chose
to
or
had
to
take
related
to
their
children's
independent
activities
is
what
we're
trying
to
address.
C
Enfield.
Let
grows
legal
consultant
who
has
worked
in
this
field
for
decades
and
is
currently
working
in
six
other
states
on
similar
statutory
changes
and
miss
kendra,
burchie
washoe
county
public
defender
she's,
a
criminal
defense
attorney,
but
has
previously
worked
in
the
field
of
dependency
in
nevada,
california
and
washington
in
the
spring
of
2020.
She
taught
a
human
development
and
family
studies
course
on
families
and
public
policy
at
the
university
of
nevada
reno.
C
Before
we
take
questions
chair
scheible,
if
it's
okay
with
you,
I'd
like
to
turn
it
over
briefly-
and
I
will
emphasize
the
briefly
part
to
dr
peter
gray
of
boston
college,
co-founder
of
let
grow
an
expert
on
child
resistance
and
then
he
will
be
followed
even
more
briefly.
By
will
adler,
who
is
the
lobbyist
for
let
grow.
E
Thank
you
senator
harris.
I
am
a
research
psychologist,
long
been
studying
developmental
psychology,
I'm
author
of
an
introductory
textbook
in
psychology
and
of
many
papers
on
children's
play
and
what
children
learn
and
play.
You
know
what
we
know
that
independent
play,
meaning
play
independently
of
adults.
Children
playing
with
other
children
is
essential
for
their
healthy
physical,
emotional,
social
and
even
intellectual
development.
E
Such
play
is
how
children
learn
to
take
control
of
their
own
lives,
learn
to
make
their
own
decisions
learn
to
govern
their
own
behavior,
learn
how
to
negotiate
with
peers,
learn
to
make
friends.
You
know
these
are
skills
that
are
essential
for
children
to
develop
if
they're
going
to
grow
in
a
healthy
way
towards
adulthood.
E
But
in
recent
decades
we
have
been
increasingly
depriving
children
of
the
opportunity
to
do
this.
There's
a
great
deal
of
research
evidence
that
shows
us
the
opportunities
that
children
have
to
just
go
outdoors
and
play
with
other
kids
or
to
do
things
like
walk
independently
to
school
are
far
far
less
than
they
were
a
few
decades
ago
and
over
this
same
period
of
time
that
we
have
seen
this
huge
decline
in
children's
opportunities
for
independent
play
and
exploration.
E
We've
seen
a
huge
increase
in
all
sorts
of
mental
disorders
in
childhood,
and
that
is
no
coincidence.
Children
are
the
the
rates
of
depression.
The
rates
of
anxiety
by
standard
clinical
questionnaires
that
have
been
given
to
children
in
unchanged
form
over
the
years
have
increased
somewhere
between
eight
and
tenfold
over
the
last
four
or
five
decades
over
this
same
period
of
time
that
children
have
become
less
and
less
free.
E
The
rate
of
suicide
among
children,
school-aged
children
has
increased
six-fold
according
to
cdc
data
between
about
1960
and
today,
the
same
period
of
time
that
we
have
been
gradually
decreasing.
Children's
freedom
to
play
and
explore
children
are
not
developing
the
kinds
of
resilience.
The
kinds
of
problem
solving
abilities,
the
kind
of
of
confidence
that
is
necessary
for
emotional
health
and
for
their
social
well-being,
because
we're
depriving
them
the
opportunity
to
play
now.
E
The
reasons
for
this
decline
in
children's
freedom
are
complex
and
obviously,
since
this
has
to
be
short,
I
can't
go
into
the
gray
into
all
the
complexity
of
it.
But
one
thing
we
know
for
sure
is
that
one
reason
parents
don't
send
their
kids
out
is:
they
are
afraid
that
they
will
be
charged
of
neglect,
whether
or
not
they
will.
They
are
afraid
they
may
they've
all
heard
of
such
cases.
They've
seen
such
cases,
and
so
whether
or
not
this
is
common
in
nevada,
and
I
don't
honestly
know
if
it
is
common
in
nevada.
E
F
Thank
you,
doug
grain,
hello,
my
name
is:
will
adler,
I
am
representing
silver
state
government
relations
day
who
is
representing?
Let
grow
the
child
advocacy
group
here.
Let
grow
came
to
us
first
with
this
bill
and
a
general
message
was
we're
trying
to
increase
the
independence
of
children
in
nevada,
and
my
first
response
was:
doesn't
the
vat
already
have
pretty
independent
children?
I
said
you
know
it
does,
but
it's
kind
of
in
equal
too.
F
So
that's
where
we
started
with
this
bill
and
we
we
kind
of
wanted
to
direct
it
at
what
can
we
do
the
most
good
with
in
nevada
and
we're
some
some
key
places
where
we
do
need
improvement,
because
we're
cognizant
of
that
nevada
is
not
the
most
impactful
state.
With
this
that
we
have
not
always
been
the
most.
F
You
know
judgmental
state
when
it
came
to
child
independence,
but
it
is
something
that
we're
cognizant,
because
I,
as
a
child,
grew
up
with
the
independence
available
to
me
to
walk
to
school,
to
ride
my
bike
and
to
be
basically
free
across.
You
know
northern
nevada
as
long
as
it's
home
by
bedtime
right.
But
I
understand
that
is
not
equally
available
to
a
lot
of
people.
F
A
lot
of
families
don't
feel
like
they
can
take
those
same
practices
as
I
was
grown,
grown
up
with
as
normal,
because
there
is
a
risk
of
having
these
reports
come
into
you,
and
especially
for
single
parents
and
and
households
who
don't
have
the
same
opportunities.
Mine
did
so
taking
this.
From
that
point
of
view,
we
did
try
and
work
as
best
we
could
with
the
da's
and
law
enforcement
and
other
parties
related
in
in
the
the
state.
But
you
know
with
with
code
and
everything
else.
F
We
are
still
in
the
process
of
crafting
this
amendment,
but
the
conceptual
member
bringing
for
you
today
hopefully
has
a
lot
of
their
concerns
covered
and
has
taken
a
big
step
at
trying
to
reach
that
independence
and
the
freedom
for
the
parent
to
feel
like
they.
They
will
not
be
prosecuted
overly
much
or
unjustly
when
it
comes
to
letting
their
children
be
somewhat
independent
in
the
state
of
nevada.
So
basically,
this
bill
is
is
not
looking
to
create
any.
You
know
judgmental
or
change
in
the
current
way.
F
Neglect
or
abuse
are
reported,
we're
not
looking
to
close
down
any
hotlines,
we're
not
looking
to
take
any
actions
that
prevent
people
from
reporting
businesses,
but
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
structurally
change
somewhat
what
it
is
to
have
a
report
of
this
and
to
basically
put
it
to
apparent
that
if
they
were
doing
something
that
was
in
the
realm
of
normal,
that
it
was
okay,
but
if
they
were
doing
something
that
is
clearly
and
likely
to
cause
harm.
F
That
would
be
the
the
line
where
you'd
say
that
is
is
not
correct
for
for
this
to
happen
here.
So
hopefully,
this
this
bill
can
be
well
received.
We
do
feel
like
it
has
a
place
in
the
state,
and
I
I
feel
like
it
will
bring
a
great
opportunity
to
open
up.
You
know
the
idea
that
it's
okay
to
let
your
children
be
independent
and
you're,
still
a
good
parent.
So
thank
you
very
much.
G
Yeah,
I
usually
do.
Thank
you
church.
I
will
just
a
quick
question
for
dr
gray.
I'm
wondering
we've
heard
about
this
free-range
kids
for
years.
You
know
this
idea
that
we
want
to
let
them
get
out
and
and
explore
and
learn
through
experience
and
the
downsides
for
keeping
them
cloistered.
G
I'm
wondering,
though,
how
do
we,
the
the
pushback
traditionally,
was
well
with
the
increased
number
of
of
abductions
and
assaults,
and
these
sorts
of
things
that
we
hear
about
on
the
news
you
know
we've
got
to
strike
a
balance.
How
do
we
strike
a
balance,
because
I
know
cps
is
required
to
investigate
every
credible
report
that
they
get,
whether
or
not
that
turns
into
a
removal
or
not
they're
still
required
to
investigate.
How
do
we
legislate?
That
kind
of
balance.
C
E
Okay,
yes,
this
is
peter
gray
speaking.
Thank
you
for
that
reminder.
So,
right
now
all
we
can.
All
I
can
say
for
sure
right
now
is
the
balance
is
way
out
of
kilter.
E
You
know
everybody
hears
about
any
case
that
occurs
anywhere
in
the
nation
when
some
child
is
tragically
harmed
in
some
way
or
dies
in
some
way.
The
truth
of
the
matter
is
the
data.
Are
these
cases
are
very,
very
rare.
The
kinds
of
cases
that
we
hear
about
are
very
rare.
That's
why
they're
newsworthy?
E
That's
why
we
all
hear
about
them,
so
we
tend
to
have
these
in
our
mind,
and
these
inhibit
parents,
unfortunately
very
frequently
from
feeling
free
to
let
their
children
out
and
also
leads
child
welfare
people
and
people
in
general
to
be
very,
very
concerned
about
children
being
out
there,
but
over
concern
over
concern.
The
truth
of
the
matter
is
the
rates
of
these
crimes.
E
No
parents
need
to
use
judgment.
The
state
needs
to
use
judgment,
but
let's
use
common
sense
judgment
and
let's
base
those
those
judgments
on
on
the
real
data
and
not
on
our
imagined
worst
possible
thing
that
could
possibly
happen
to
the
child.
You
know
you
can
get
hit
by
lightning
too,
but
if
you
were
to
run
your
life
in
that
way
that
you're
going
to
you're
not
going
to
do
anything
because
you
might
get
hit
by
lightning,
you
would
have
a
very
unhappy
life
and,
unfortunately,
we're
producing
that
kind
of
unhappy
life
for
many
children.
G
Right
I
appreciate
that
and
and
it's
my
understanding
and
just
for
your
perspective,
my
wife
is
one
of
the
the
abuse
neglect
court,
the
dependency
court
judges
and
I
I
asked
her
about
this
bill
and
she
said
she
doesn't
usually
hear
about
these
kinds
of
cases
because
they
don't
usually
have
petitions
filed
against
him
for
this
sort
of
thing.
G
But
she
was
telling
me
that
we've
known
for
years
that
we,
when
we
keep
particularly
young
children,
cloistered
and-
and
we
don't
allow
them
out
and
to
interact
with
other
children-
that
that
has
some
really
significant
long-term
effects,
negative
long-term
effects
and
that
we've
known
that
for
years,
do
you
concur
with
that.
E
Absolutely
concur
with
that.
Yes,
this
is
something
that
I
have
long
been
writing
about.
Publishing
some
of
the
data
concerning
this
is
something
that
everybody
in
the
country
should
be
aware
of,
and
we
should
be
working
to
reverse
this
trend
of
increasingly
cloistering
children,
increasing
decreasing,
decreasing
their
opportunities
to
play,
explore,
learn
to
be
independent.
E
G
All
right,
thank
you
for
that,
and
I'm
a
huge
supporter
of
this.
Thank
you
church
iveland.
Thank
you,
senator
harris
for
bringing
the
bill
and
to
sally
william
hanson,
I'm
in
full
support
of
this
bill.
Thank
you.
F
H
Madam
chair,
I'm
especially
fond
of
at
least
both
the
bill's
sponsors
actually,
but
one
in
particular,
so
I
admit,
I'm
a
little
biased
in
this
particular
case.
However,
I
was
really
delighted
to
hear
what
senator
picker
just
said,
because
his
wife
obviously
works
in
this
exact
arena
and
he
apparently
feels
that
this
bill
is
reasonable.
Dr
green,
my
question
to
you
is:
have
you
actually
had
a
chance
to
review
the
amended
bill?
And-
and
if
yes
do
you
regard
that
as
reasonable?
H
Because
there's
no
question-
you
know
the
phenomenon
that
I
see
and
I
describe
I
see
30
year
old,
males
living
at
home
and
and
on
their
computer
24
7,
and
they
they
literally
have
had
no
interaction
with
the
real
world,
and
I
don't
know
you
know.
I
grew
up
in
a
different
era.
H
Sorry
doctor,
actually
it
was
kind
of
a
ramble
on
my
part,
but
from
your
field
of
expertise
you
mentioned
these
children
are
not
allowed
to
develop
a
normal
normal
process.
Now
your
field
of
expertise
is
the
child
side
of
it.
I'm
just
wondering:
have
you
followed
through
with
these
children
and
seeing
what
they're,
what
what
happens
to
them
as
adults,
if
they're
not
allowed
to
do
the
normal?
Yes,
yes,
thank
you.
E
I
I
get
it
and
it,
and
indeed
I
have
been
very
much
concerned
with
that
question.
So
let
me
give
you
an
example.
A
few
years
ago
I
was
invited
by
the
head
of
the
counseling
department,
the
mental
health
department
at
the
university,
where
I
work
who
who
wanted
me
to
join
him
in
some
meetings
with
professors
and
with
the
guidance
counselors
and
the
therapists
at
the
school
about
the
fact
that
over
the
last
decade,
there
has
been
an
enormous
increase
in
emotional
breakdowns
among
college
students.
E
This
is
not
just
at
the
university
I
wear
work.
This
is
everywhere,
there's
a
decline
in
resilience,
there's
a
decline
in
the
ability
for
young
adults,
and
in
this
case
these
are
people
in
college
to
deal
with
the
bumps
in
the
road
of
life,
once
they're,
somewhat
independent
they've
gone
off,
they've
left
their
homes
or
now
at
the
university
things
like
an
argument
with
their
roommate
or
a
romantic
breakup
or
a
bad
grade,
our
cause
for
mental
breakdown.
E
Increasingly,
I'm
absolutely
convinced
that
this
is
because
we're
not
allowing
children
to
experience
those
kinds
of
things
on
the
smaller
scale
that
they
experience
them.
As
they're
growing
up-
and
so
this
is
absolutely
true-
I
do
believe
this
is
true.
We're
also
hearing
increasingly-
and
I
I
get
emails
from
employers
of
young
adults
who
tell
me
that
these
young
people
want
to
be
told
exactly
what
to
do
exactly
what
to
do
as
if
they
can't
figure
things
out
on
their
own
in.
H
E
A
Thank
you
all
we'll
move
next
to
majority
leader
cannizzaro.
I
understand
you
have
a
few
questions.
I
Yes,
thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
senator
harrison
assemblywoman
hanson.
I
I
let
me
first
start
by
saying
that
I
think
I
probably
was
raised
very
similarly
in
you
know,
being
asked
to
be
outside
and
have
a
little
bit
of
independence,
also
because
my
parents
worked
full-time-
and
I
often
remember
times
where
I
was
told
to
head
outside
and
go
come
back
in
until
the
street
lights
come
on,
so
that
I
was
outside
in
enjoying
and
playing
with
the
neighborhood
kids
and
and
we
all
kind
of
did
that
together
in
the
apartment
complex
and
on
the
street,
where
I
lived.
I
So
I
completely
agree
with,
I
think
the
goals
of
this
particular
bill
and
I'm
very
supportive
of
what
you're
trying
to
do
in
terms
of
sort
of
more
definitely
defining
like
what
constitutes
when
we
get
into
child
abuse
and
neglect
and
where
we're
just
really
seeing
parents
trying
to
give
their
kids
a
little
bit
more
independence.
I
And
so
I
want
to
start
there.
But
I
do
have
some
questions
just
about
some
of
the
language
in
the
bill
in
this
in
and
I'm
going
off
the
conceptual
amendment.
So
in
section
two,
where
you
include
under
amendment
number,
two
section:
two
where
it
has
the
inclusion
of
criminal
with
criminal
negligence,
where
we're
talking
about
where
someone
allows
or
permits
a
child
who
they
are
either
the
parent
or
guardian
of
or
are
in
charge
of
the
super.
The
safety
and
welfare
of
that
child.
I
Where
you
include
that
definition
of
criminal
negligence
and
then
further
on
down
in
subsection
f
under
section
four,
where
it
has
the
definition
of
criminal
negligence,
as
means
a
gross
deviation
from
the
standard
of
care
that
a
reasonable
person
would
observe
in
the
person's
situation,
can
you
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
about
why
the
inclusion
of
criminal
negligence
there,
and
why
that
particular
definition
if
that
exists
elsewhere,
if
that
is
what
that
is
meant
to
or
intended
to
capture,
because
the
way
that
I
am
sort
of
reading
this,
if
you're,
including
in
the
definition
of
what
either
doesn't
constitute
abuse
or
neglect
of
a
child
or
what
is
not
negligent
negligent
maltreatment
of
a
child
some
of
these
activities,
I'm
wondering
why
we're
adding
that
with
criminal
negligence,
piece
to
it.
J
Kendrick
for
the
record
and
just
for
the
committee's
information,
this
was
based.
This
language
was
based
off
of
trying
to
work
around
the
concerns
that
we
heard
from
the
district
attorney's
office.
In
some
states
they
have
the
requirement
of
actual
harm.
J
We
don't
believe
that
that's
necessary
at
this
time
in
order
to
have
that
requirement,
which
is
why
originally,
the
language
did
include
is
likely
to
other
states,
including
new
york,
has
it
is
likely
to
language,
but
we
heard
from
district
attorneys
offices
that
they
had
some
concerns
over
trying
to
prove
the
foreseeability
of
the
actions
or
inactions.
J
So
this
criminal
negligence
was
based
off
of
of
law
that
we
found
here
in
nevada,
specifically
from
in
court
cornella
c-o-r-n-e-l-l-a
versus
justice,
court
and
I'll
provide
that
site
to
the
committee,
which
that's
how
they
described
criminal
negligence,
and
we
felt
that
that
was
a
fair
middle
grounds
where
we're
taking
into
the
district
attorney's
concerns,
but
also
clarifying.
I
And
I
appreciate
that
miss
miss
burchie,
I
guess
as
a
follow-up
chair,
if
I,
if
I
may,
thank
you
the
so
I
guess
my
question
is
when
we're,
when
we're
actually
going
further
in
the
statute,
for
example,
under
432,
be
o2o,
we're
defining
abuse
or
neglect
of
a
child
and
you're
adding
this
language
that
talks
about
specifically
where
we
are
getting
at.
I
think
these
independent
activities,
where
child's
outside
playing
where
they
may
be
left
home
unattended,
but
otherwise
you
know,
can
kind
of
fend
for
themselves.
I
Obviously
we're
not
talking
about
sort
of
a
one-year-old
old
child.
We
might
be
talking
about
a
an
older
child.
Why
is
that
not
enough,
when
you
also
pair
that,
with
the
changes
to
432b
140
with
respect
to
negligent
treatment
or
maltreatment
of
a
child.
J
And
kendrick
archie
for
the
record
with
the
washington
county
public
defender's
office.
When
we
were
reviewing
these
bills
we
and
working
with
legro,
we
didn't
feel
that
it
was
enough
because
it
doesn't
provide
enough
clarity,
especially
when
you're
just
looking
at
the
criminal
statute.
As
you
know,
you
also
have
to
look
at
the
neglect
the
432b
statute
in
charging
those
cases,
but
we
felt
that
it
was
important
to
add
extra
clarity
into
that
first,
the
criminal
statute.
I
I
Maybe
you
have
a
parent
who
continues
to
leave
a
child
with
with
someone
who
is
a
boyfriend
or
a
girlfriend
or
a
caretaker
who
that
child
is
being
either
sexually
abused
or
physically
abused
and
and
whether
we
are
sort
of
blurring
the
lines
between
that
which
I
I
would
which
I
would
personally
say
is
constitutes
a
criminal,
a
criminal
offense.
But
if
we're
saying
well,
is
that
a
gross
deviation,
if
you're
just
going
to
leave
somebody
to
have
care
over
that
child?
I
But
I
completely
understand
where
you're
coming
from
with
wanting
more
clarity
just
in
the
criminal
context,
because
I
think
what
you're
trying
to
get
at
in
terms
of
behavior
on
behalf
of
parents,
guardians
and
other
caretakers
is
very
reasonable
and
we
should
be
doing
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
when
we're
doing
that,
we're
not
somehow
exempting
those
individuals,
I
think,
are
very
liable
and
and
fall
under
this
statute
or
doing
things
that
are
far
outside
of
what
we're
talking
about
here.
So
I
think
maybe
some
further
conversations.
But
thank
you
appreciate.
C
That
and
the
church,
if
I
may
also
just
very
quickly
address
some
of
vice
chair
kennezaro's
concerns
one
of
the
this
you're
hitting
on.
C
I
think
what
was
one
of
the
largest
issues
we've
been
trying
to
work
out
with
this
bill
and
the
concern
of
myself
and
and
the
sponsors
was
really
about
the
term
may,
where
that
is
statistically,
like
anything
point:
zero
zero
one
percent
like
possibility
can
fall
under
that,
and
so
we're
we're
trying
to
find
a
way
where
we're
moving
that
just
a
little
bit
more
to
a
a
less
broad
exemption.
And
so
we
are
still
working
on
trying
to
find
that
perfect
balance.
I
K
I'm
I'm
just
wondering
this
may
be
a
question
for
dr
gray.
Do
you
think
that
when
there's
been
that
visit-
and
maybe
it
was
found
not
substantiated-
that
the
family
may
be
even
less
inclined
to
let
the
child
go
to
the
park
or
go
to
the
community
play
area
or
go?
You
know,
hang
out
with
a
friend
visit
a
friend.
E
E
I
know
that
my
child
needs
independent
outdoor
play,
but
I
don't
dare
allow
it
sometimes.
Sometimes
people
get
a
visit
simply
because
of
a
child
even
playing
in
the
front
yard,
a
young
player
playing
in
the
front
yard.
The
mom
is
looking
out,
sees
the
child,
and
yet
somebody
reports
it
and
then
there's
a
visit
and
and
that's
not
not
likely
to
go
anywhere
in
the
court,
but
it
scares
the
parent.
It
really
does
scare
the
parent.
E
So
I
think
parents
really
need
insurance
where
that
they're
going
to
be
trusted
to
make
judgments
like
this
about
about
their
kids.
A
Thank
you,
senator
settlemyer.
G
G
I
appreciate
it
sorry
I
was
trying
to
unmute
at
the
same
time,
you're
unmuting
me.
I
appreciate
the
bill
immensely.
I
think
it's
very
important
that
children
have
individual
time
individual
play.
In
fact,
I'd
actually
go
further
to
say
it's
neglectful
for
parents
that
unfortunately,
don't
encourage
their
children
to
get
outside,
but
I
also
think
it's
neglect
to
not
have
these
kids
in
school
at
this
point
in
time.
G
But
the
question
I
have
is
what
age
do
you
think
that's
appropriate
for
individual
play
autonomy
and
things
of
that
nature
because
being
in
agriculture,
some
people
actually
would
give
my
father
a
bad
time,
because
six
and
eight
years
old,
I
was
actually
out
working
alone.
But
at
what
age
do
you
think
is
appropriate
for
this
type
of
discussion.
C
And
church
I
will
I'll
respond
to
that
to
senator
silomai
or
through
you.
I
think
the
whole
point
is
that
it's
up
to
the
parent.
They
know
that
age
and
assessment,
much
more
than
any
of
us,
could
ever
draw
some
bright
line.
You
know
there
are
some
16
year
olds
who
aren't
ready
to
drive
and
I'm
hoping
parents
aren't
encouraging
them
to
get
out
there.
You
know
this
is
really
about
parents
who
know
their
children
and
their
abilities.
C
There
are
some
young
children
who
are
tech,
savvy
and
and
can
call
9-1-1
from
a
phone
not
only
that
but
jump
online
on
messenger
if
the
the
internet
or
if
the
power's
down
and
reach
out
to
another
parent-
or
you
know
that's
up
to
each
individual
parent
and
I
think
that's
the
idea.
We
need
to
start
pushing
these
decisions
and
empowering
parents
to
to
make
those
choices,
and
the
truth
is
children
vary
greatly
in
their
abilities
and
that's
what
should
be
taken
into
account.
G
A
Much
okay.
I
also
have
a
couple
of
questions
or
really
one
question
which
has
to
do
with
the
how
this
statute
is
going
to
be
utilized,
because
I
also
like
everybody
here
appreciate
the
purpose
of
it
and
the
concept
behind
it.
But
I'm
trying
to
understand
is
the
idea
that,
once
a
parent
is
arrested
for
criminal
neglect
that
their
defense
attorney
will
bring
up.
You
know
the
new
432
b
and
say
actually
no,
this
was
fine.
A
Is
the
idea
that
cps
specialists
investigators
will
review
the
conduct
of
a
parent
they're
investigating
against
these
new
statutes
and
say:
oh
wait,
something
we
would
have
found
substantiated
last
year.
We
won't
find
substantiated
this
year
or
is
the
idea
that
people
are
going
to
start
reading
the
nrs
and
stop
calling
law
enforcement
when
their
neighbors,
let
their
kids
stay
out
too
late,
because
they
know
that
it's
not
considered
neglect
under
the
law.
C
And
I'll
I'll
go
ahead
and
I'll
take
I'll.
Take
that
and
then
allow
my
colleagues
to
jump
in
if
they
find
I've
missed
something.
It
is
definitely
not
the
third.
C
We
want
people
calling
in
when
they
feel
children
are
being
neglected,
but
I
do
hope
that
it
is
the
first
two
where
defense
attorneys
will
be
able,
in
reasonable
circumstances,
to
to
make
the
argument
that
the
parent
was
not
neglectful,
and
I
do
also
hope
that
we
can
send
a
a
signal
via
statute,
that
parents
can
feel
a
little
more
free
to
be
able
to
parent
their
children
and
not
be
worried
about
any
kind
of
criminal
negligence
or
any
other
severe
repercussions.
Based
upon
that.
C
So
I
would
say
it's
definitely
the
first
two,
the
third
I
I
do
not
anticipate
this
bill,
resulting
in.
A
So
I
have
a
follow-up
question
from
my
own
experience
in
criminal
law
and,
seeing
you
know
some
really
egregious
cases
of
abuse
and
neglect,
seeing
some
less
egregious
cases
and
sometimes
going
through
a
file
and
seeing
cases
where
the
the
court
or
a
child
protective
agency
frankly
should
have
stepped
in
a
lot
earlier.
A
So
did
this
as
the
sponsors
of
the
bill
as
the
experts
in
this
area,
I
I
know
you
can't
cite
to
specific
cases
and
you
know
tell
other
people's
stories,
but
are
you
aware
of
instances
where
you
think
you
would
be
comfortable
with
the
court
having
dismissed
a
case
or
not
finding
a
case
substantiated
that
they
did
find
substantiated
here
in
the
state
of
nevada
based
on
what
would
be
the
new
statute?
J
Kendra
burchie
with
the
washoe
county,
public
defender's
office,
chair
scheible,
that's
a
really
great
question
and
I
think
a
lot
of
it
is
from
what
we're
hearing
from
stakeholders
across
nevada
and
especially
in
washoe
county
social
services,
are
already
implementing
some
of
these
police
policies.
The
goal
here
is
obviously
to
ensure
that
we're
codifying
that
so
that
for
the
next
director,
the
next
agency,
they
keep
up
that
standard.
J
So
it's
difficult
to
say
that
this
right
now
would
have
impacted
a
lot
of
our
clients.
I'm
hopeful
that
social
services
or
the
human
services
agency
is
providing
maybe
what
we
call
an
informal
case
plan
so
providing
them
with
the
services
from
from
the
outside,
instead
of
bringing
them
into
the
fold
or
removing
the
child.
A
Thank
you
that
does
help
clarify,
and
I
think
sometimes
you
know
we
often
say
that
we
use
legislation
to
solve
a
problem.
Sometimes
we
also
use
legislation
to
keep
doing
something
that
we're
doing
right.
So
if
this
codifies
policy
that
is
working,
that's
also
a
good
step
in
the
right
direction,
and
I
appreciate
you
eliciting
that
for
me
does
anybody
else
have
questions
for
the
presenters
or
subject
matter?
Experts.
L
L
M
M
M
As
a
homeschool
consultant.
Many
years
ago,
I
had
a
number
of
people
that
were
concerned
because
their
neighbors
would
try
to
turn
them
into
cps
because
they
had
their
children
at
home.
So
there
was
a
little
bit
of
a
problem
there,
but
a
lot
of
that
went
away
because
we
have
computers
etc.
Now,
so
I
think
it's
very
important
that
parents
be
parents
and
have
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
teach
their
children
the
things
that
the
children
will
need
later
in
life.
Thank
you.
L
N
Hello,
chair
schaible
and
thank
you
committee
members.
This
is
nick
schipec
and
I
c-k-s-h-e-p-a-c-k
policy
and
program
associate
with
the
aclu
of
nevada
here
in
support
of
this
spell.
We
have
talked
to
directly
impacted
people
who
wish
to
testify
and
support.
However,
there's
a
very
real
fear
about
talking
publicly
about
open,
cps
cases.
If
you
do
not
hear
from
them
today,
we
will
help
them
provide
written
statements
or
set
up
private
meetings
with
legislators.
N
Nevada
must
tighten
its
child
neglect
statutes
and
give
parents
the
freedom
they
need
to
raise
their
children
without
fear.
This
is
a
racial
justice
issue.
Each
year,
law
enforcement
and
school
personnel
file,
the
most
referrals
making
up
over
50
of
all
referrals
to
dcff
racial
disparities
in
our
systems
and
unconscious
bias
fuel.
This
racial
justice
issue,
our
schools,
our
police,
dcfs,
the
district
attorney's
offices,
as
well
as
the
public
defender's
offices
in
the
state,
are
all
disproportionately
white.
N
While
these
public
servants
are
some
of
the
most
well-intentioned
and
hardworking
people
in
the
state,
it
is
clear
that
the
current
makeup
of
our
system,
this
favors
families
of
color
and
puts
them
at
a
higher
risk
of
being
investigated
for
child
neglect
and
having
a
child
removed.
Clear
in
narrow
neglect
statutes,
will
help
protect
these
families
to
drive
home
the
racial
justice
issue.
Here
I
want
to
share
a
few
numbers
from
washoe
county.
N
This
is
county
provided
data
based
on
zip
codes.
The
data
is
from
the
2016
to
20
2020.,
the
south.
We
know
area
which
is
90
percent
white
and
has
a
population
of
27
000
people
had
142
investigations
and
33
removals.
N
The
west
reno
out
to
about
the
verdi
area,
which
is
80
percent
white
and
has
a
population
of
31
000,
had
393
investigations
and
61
removals
over
this
four
year
period.
In
comparison,
the
reno
of
the
midtown
reno
area,
which
includes
midtown
and
the
area
around
the
airport,
which
is
only
65
white
and
has
a
population
of
just
under
forty
thousand,
had
over
eighteen
thousand
investigations
and
five
hundred
and
thirty
five
removals.
N
L
L
M
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
jeanine
hansen,
I'm
the
state
president
of
nevada
families
for
freedom.
I
also
have
a
degree
in
child
development
and
family
relations,
I'm
very
happy
about
this
bill
and
we're
thankful
for
those
that
have
brought
it
forward.
It's
a
sensible
parenting
bill.
It
allows
parents
to
make
deliberate
decisions
about
their
parenting
and
the
ability
to
give
their
children
the
opportunity
to
play
outdoors
with
other
children,
walk
to
school
and
stay
home
alone
if
they
are
mature
enough
without
fear
of
being
charged
with
neglect.
M
L
O
My
name
is
ernie
adler,
e-r-n-I-e-a-d-l-e-r
and
I'm
speaking
in
favor
of
this
bill.
I
remember
when
I
was
a
child
growing
up.
We
had
a
family
of
six,
so
my
mom
could
not
keep
track
of
us
with
and
didn't
need
to
keep
track
of
us.
Essentially,
I
had
about
a
two
mile
radius
around
my
house.
I
could
ride
my
bicycle
to
the
school
the
park
and
places
like
that
that
we
would
play.
L
L
L
P
E-R-I-N-P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S,
I'm
the
president
of
power
to
parent,
and
I
represent
nearly
10
000
parents
across
the
state
of
nevada.
Our
organization
exists
to
empower
parents
to
advocate
for
their
children,
because
we
believe
that
parents
know
what's
best
for
their
children
and
they
know
their
children
best.
We
are
in
support
of
this
bill
sb143
because
we
believe
that
only
parents
understand
the
maturity
of
their
child
and
can
best
make
decisions
regarding
their
level
of
independence.
P
Parenting
is
difficult
enough
without
the
fear
of
cps
or
other
government
agencies.
Second,
guessing
reasonable
parenting
decisions,
especially
in
this
last
year,
where
parents
have
had
to
make
the
impossible
decisions
regarding
whether
to
leave
your
children
home
while
learning
online
or
go
to
work.
We
know
low-income
families
are
disproportionately
affected
because
they
are
without
resources
for
child
care.
Families
should
not
be
punished
for
providing
for
their
families.
P
As
a
former
foster
parent
myself,
I
understand
and
appreciate
the
need
for
these
agencies
in
the
cases
of
real
and
serious
neglect
or
abuse,
but
I
understand
that
responsible
parents
can
and
should
be
allowed
to
make
reasonable
parenting
decisions
about
the
maturity
and
independence
of
their
children.
We
are
grateful
for
this
bipartisan
legislation
that
protects
the
rights
of
parents
to
make
reasonable
parenting
decisions
for
their
children.
Thank
you
for
bringing
it
forward.
L
B
Good
afternoon,
tara,
scheibel
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
christine
saunders.
That's
c-h-r-I-s-t-I-n-e
s-a-u-n-d-e-r-s,
I'm
the
policy
director
with
progressive
leadership
alliance
in
nevada,
here
in
support
of
senate
bill
143
march
8th,
actually
marks
international
women's
day
the
day
to
recognize
the
accomplishments
of
women.
B
Like
the
bill
sponsors,
I
was
raised
by
a
single
mother
who
worked
full
time
to
provide
for
my
brother
and
I
all,
while
also
completing
her
master's
degree
in
teaching
to
be
strong
and
independent.
The
current
law
has
had
a
disproportionate
impact
on
low-income
families
of
color.
Sb
143
is
a
simple
clarification
for
families
and
we
ask
for
your
support
of
the
bill.
Thank
you.
L
L
Q
Good
afternoon,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
this
is
john
piro
j-o-h-n-p-I-r-o
of
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office.
I'd
like
to
thank
senator
harris
and
assemblywoman
hanson
for
bringing
this
legislation
forward.
We
believe
that
this
legislation
enables
good
parents
to
make
decisions
within
a
re
within
reasonable
guidelines,
providing
some
modicum
of
predictability
in
the
criminal
justice
system,
as
opposed
to
the
nebulous
word
may
that
currently
exist
there.
Q
We
have
proffered
a
chance
at
defining
criminal
negligence,
which
is
defined
in
case
law
from
the
case
cornell
v,
justice
court,
132,
nev,
dot,
587
pin,
site
593
294
is
the
page,
and
it's
a
2016
case.
We've
heard
some
concerns
from
the
district
attorneys
that
this
change
would
make
it
almost
impossible
to
prosecute
these
cases,
but
we
believe
those
claims
to
be
unfounded
as
new
york
has
a
very
similar
statute
and
we
have
not
heard
anything
to
that
effect
that
they
find
it
impossible
to
prosecute
these
types
of
cases.
L
P
We
are
in
support
of
scp-143,
which
will
make
the
law
around
child
neglect
more
clear
and
prevent
unjustified
interventions,
and
the
removal
of
children
from
their
homes.
Interventions,
including
the
removal
of
a
child
from
their
parents,
are
traumatizing
to
the
child.
Research
shows
that
separating
a
child
from
their
parents
has
long-term
detrimental
effects
on
a
child's
emotional
and
psychological
health
and
well-being.
P
O
L
M
P
L
A
L
B
B
I
am
currently
the
director
of
the
washoe
county
human
services
agency,
as
the
bill
is
proposed
today
we
are,
we
are
opposed
to
this
legislation,
but
have
been
working
with
the
sponsors,
and
we
appreciate
all
the
ongoing
dialogue
and
look
forward
to
further
enhancing
it.
About
eight
years
ago,
we
embarked
on
a
statewide
change
throughout
our
system
on
our
intervention
with
families
and
removals.
B
Our
safety
model
requires
us
to
do
whatever
we
can
to
mitigate
a
removal
by
finding
alternatives
to
placement
in
foster
care.
Staff
are
now
required
to
exhaust
all
efforts
to
mitigate
removal.
Our
state
has
made
dramatic
changes
in
how
we
serve
families
in
washoe
county.
Our
removals
have
decreased
by
38
percent
in
the
last
five
years.
Less
than
15
percent
of
our
removals
are
due
to
lack
of
supervision,
which
many
of
these
case
examples
surround.
B
However,
our
foster
care
demographics
are
showing
in
washoe
county
60
percent
of
our
foster
care
population
is
five
and
under
so
when
removal
occurs,
the
majority
of
the
time
they
are
very
young
and
very
vulnerable,
and
nothing
can
be
mitigated
to
keep
them
at
home.
Our
data,
unfortunately,
is
not
telling
us
that
we
have
a
disproportionate
rate
of
inappropriate
removals
and,
in
fact
our
removal
rate
is
below
the
national
average.
We've
been
unable
to
come
up
with
any
data
to
support
this
need,
and
our
data
certainly
doesn't
suggest
that
this
is
problematic.
B
This
proposed
legislation
would
not
codify
our
policies.
Washoe
county
wants
to
be
careful
that
we
don't
create
law
that
impacts
the
significant
improvements
that
we've
made
and
continue
to
ensure
the
right
children
are
placed
in
care
and
families
get
services
to
prevent
placement
in
foster
care.
We
believe
this
is
an
education
issue
not
to
be
solved
by
statute.
Our
workers
in
the
field
present
themselves
as
a
helpful
resource
and
not
a
threat
or
as
a
form
of
harassment.
B
L
L
R
Good
afternoon,
chair
shy
bull.
This
is
bridget
duffy,
b
r.
I
g
I
g-I-d-d-u-f-f-y.
I
am
the
director
of
the
juvenile
division
for
the
clark
county
district
attorney's
office.
My
attorneys
support
the
clark
county
department
of
family
services
and
I'm
here
today
to
submit
the
clark
county
department
of
family
services,
testimony
on
the
record
in
opposition,
chair
scheible
and
members
of
the
committee.
R
I
submit
also
as
to
the
same
testimony
that
director
hal
has
made
on
behalf
of
washoe
county,
and
I
would
like
to
add
just
a
brief
statement
more
this
session.
You
will
be
seeing
legislation
that
is
going
to
put
into
statute
a
requirement
that
child
welfare
agencies
must
have
warrants
to
remove
children
from
their
homes,
absent
exigency.
R
All
of
those
removal,
absent
exigency
or
emergency
circumstances
must
have
a
check
and
balances
from
balance
from
a
court
to
determine
whether
or
not
we
may
seize
that
child
and
remove
that
is
based
upon
a
ninth
circuit
decision
and
child
welfare
agencies
are
subject
to
civil
rights
violations
and
lawsuits
for
removing
children,
absent
exigency
and
without
a
warrant.
That
is
a
layer
of
protection
that
I
believe
has
been
ignored
with
this
legislation
that
we
are
not
just
going
in
and
taking
children
absent
court
review
prior
to
that
removal.
R
I
also
want
to
bring
attention
to
amendment
number
three
new
section,
2
and
432b
0.020
subsection
2c,
which
uses
the
term
person
responsible
for
the
welfare
of
the
child.
That
term
is
actually
defined
already
in
432
b
and
extends
the
things
such
as
residential
treatment
facilities,
day
care
facilities
and
institutions.
R
R
This
legislation
is
not
going
to
stop
on
the
knock
on
that
door
because
we're
going
to
need
to
investigate
to
determine
that
sufficient
maturity,
physical
condition
and
mental
ability,
and
I'd
like
to
highlight
that
dr
gray
even
indicated
he's
not
even
sure
this
is
a
problem
here.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
look
forward
to
talking
with
you
all
offline.
L
L
H
H
H
We
agree,
first
of
all,
with
the
premise
that
children
should
be
given
appropriate
amounts
of
independence
to
aid
with
their
physical,
mental
or
emotional
development,
and
that's
not
in
dispute
here.
What
we
do
dispute
is
that
changing
our
abuse
and
neglect
laws
are
the
vehicle
in
which
to
accomplish
those
goals.
H
Our
first
major
concern
with
this
bill
is
that
is
presented
as
a
providing
parents
with
more
guidance,
but
this
bill
doesn't
just
apply
to
parents,
it
redefines
a
person
responsible
for
the
welfare
of
a
child,
and
that
is
much
broader
than
just
parents.
That
includes
daycare
workers,
teachers
babysitters.
H
Anyone
who
comes
in
contact
with
a
child
on
a
somewhat
regular
basis
in
essence,
while
this
bill
purports
to
provide
protection
and
guidance
to
parents.
In
fact,
it
makes
it
harder
for
law
enforcement
and
cps
to
investigate
and
prosecute
daycare
workers,
coaches
preschool
teachers
and
other
non-parental
figures
who
neglect
children.
H
This
bill
would
allow
these
non-parental
authorities
to
assert
their
opinions
of
a
child's
maturity,
physical
or
mental
condition
as
a
defense.
They
are
not
parents,
they
are
not
in
the
same
position
as
parents,
but
this
bill
gives
them
parental
standing
to
make
these
determinations
and
would
make
prosecuting
them
harder.
H
Our
second
issue
is
with
the
addition
of
criminal
negligence.
In
section
one,
I
will
say
that
the
word
is
better
than
the
proposed
original
version,
but
it
is
still
not
in
a
position
where
da's
can
support
it.
We
have
been
and
will
continue
to
be
involved
as
this
bill
develops,
and
we
look
forward
to
continuing
that
dialogue.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
L
D
Oh
sorry,
that's
me
and
I
screwed
up
once
before
by
I
should
have
been
in
the
pro
list.
This
is
lenore
skanesy,
l-e-n-o-r-e,
skinned
s-k-e-n-a-z-y,
I'm
president
of
let
grow
and
that's
the
nonprofit
that
promotes
childhood
independence.
And
before
this
I
wrote
the
book
called
free
range.
Kids
that
started
the
free
range
kids
movement
and
that
grew
into
let
grow
at
likro.
We
believe
in
safety
like
everybody
here
we
love
helmets
and
car
seats
and
seat
belts
and
mouth
guards.
D
D
They
want
them
to
walk
to
the
store,
help
them
play
outside,
but
they
don't
want
their
kids
home
staring
at
the
screen
all
day
but
they're
afraid
to
send
them
outside,
because
they're
worried
someone's
going
to
call
9-1-1
and
a
case
will
be
opened
on
them
until
they
keep.
The
kids
inside
kids
are
getting
out
of
shape,
depressed
they're
on
the
couch
they're
hurting
themselves.
D
You
heard
from
peter
gray,
but
utah
passed
the
law,
changing
that
the
free-range
parenting
law-
and
I
have
to
say
your
newspaper-
the
las
vegas
review
journal
was
extremely
enthusiastic
about
that
law
and
they
wrote
quote:
nevada
should
follow
utah's
lead,
that's
what
brought
nevada
to
my
attention.
The
review
journal
kept
writing
editorials
about
this
law
and
how
nevada
parents
need
to
know
that
they
can
let
their
kids
have
a
childhood.
So
your
citizens,
and
certainly
your
editorial
writers,
love
freedom,
family,
the
outdoors
and
giving
parents
a
fair
shake.
D
L
L
M
R-O-S-S-A-R-M-S-T-R-O-N-G,
thank
you,
chair
schreibel,
I'm
the
administrator
for
the
nevada,
division
of
child
and
family
service,
and
I
appreciate
this
committee
taking
up
this
important
conversation
as
we
kick
off
children's
we
care
at
the
nevada
legislature.
We
are
neutral
on
this
bill
today.
I
did
submit
some
data
and
information
for
the
committee's
knowledge
about
neglect
in
the
state
of
nevada,
and
I
just
wanted
to
quickly
talk
about
some
of
those
highlights.
M
M
M
In
addition,
although
neglect
is
our
most
common
substantiation,
it's
important
to
note
that
that's
that
neglect
substantiations
also
include
neglect
that
has
resulted
in
a
physical
injury
or
neglect
that
has
resulted
in
sexual
abuse.
So
we're
certainly
not
out
there
substantiating
on
folks
that
are
just
having
their
kids
walk
to
school
or
anything
like
that
and
then.
Finally,
as
director
hal
stated,
it's
important
to
note
that
nevada's
child
welfare
system
has
been
going
through
transformation
and
child
welfare
systems
across
the
country
are
going
through
transformation
as
we
focus
on
prevention
and
family
preservation.
M
M
You
know
around
rounding
up,
kids
walking
to
school
or
at
the
park.
We
definitely
appreciate
the
sponsors
wanting
to
instill
nevada
grit
in
our
children,
and
we
are
certainly
in
alignment
and
with
that
goal
again,
if
there's
any
information,
we
can
provide
the
committee
to
help
them
as
they
decide
what
to
do
with
this
build.
The
division
of
child
and
family
services
stands
ready
to
assist
with.
L
H
H
Thank
you
for
your
indulgence.
Unfortunately,
the
las
vegas
metropolitan
police
department
is
opposed
to
sb
143.
We
appreciate
the
efforts
put
forth
by
primary
sponsors,
senator
harris
and
assemblywoman
hanson
and
the
many
stakeholders
interested
in
this
measure.
Unfortunately,
despite
several
hours
of
discussion,
we
have
not
come
to
a
position
as
of
yet
where
we
can
support
the
measure.
H
We
support
the
concerns
expressed
by
our
child
protection
partners
and
the
district
attorney's
offices
in
both
juvenile
and
criminal
divisions,
as
it
relates
specifically
to
law
enforcement
operations.
It
is
difficult
to
craft
language
that
would
curtail
members
of
the
public
from
making
reports
to
law
enforcement
that
are
erroneous,
misconstrued
or
purposely
vindictive
and
not
in
turn
have
a
chilling
effect
on
law.
Enforcement's
response
to
actual
child
neglect
calls
in
short
law.
H
Enforce
enforcement
would
rather
receive
the
report
of
child
abuse
or
neglect
and
respond
accordingly
than
to
risk,
even
the
possibility
of
one
child
continuing
to
suffer
in
an
abusive
or
neglectful
situation.
As
always,
we
welcome
further
discussion
of
sb
143
in
the
hopes
of
arriving
at
a
point
where
we
can
be
in
support
of
the
measure.
With
that.
I
would
like
to
conclude
my
testimony
on
sb
143
and
thank
you,
chair
schaible,
for
your
indulgence.
I
apologize
for
my
I.t
difficulties
at
this
point.
L
L
S
Thank
you.
My
name
is
scott
coffey
s-c-o-t-t
c-o-f-f-e-e,
I'm
an
attorney
with
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office.
I've
been
an
attorney
there
for
25
years.
I've
been
involved
in
training
for
the
last
20
years
or
defense
attorneys,
and
I'm
pretty
familiar
with
the
situation
concerning
the
child
abuse
and
neglect
statutes
here
in
nevada.
First
off
I'd
like
to
apologize
for
some
technical
difficulties.
On
behalf
of
the
I
had
problems
getting
into
the
queue
here
on
behalf
of
nevada
attorneys
for
criminal
justice.
S
We
are
in
favor
of
what
has
been
proposed,
including
the
defendant
amendment
from
senator
harris
right
now.
It
is
very
difficult
to
know
what
constitutes
child
abuse
or
neglect
and
what
does
not
in
nevada.
I
will
tell
you
having
done
this
for
25
years.
If
somebody
came
into
my
office
and
asked
me,
can
I
let
my
child
do
this?
I
would
be
at
a
loss,
given
the
vague
nature
of
the
statute
that
we've
got.
S
I
think
the
amendments,
particularly
the
amendment
at
section
2,
which
talks
about
criminal
negligence,
are
critical
to
providing
some
clarity.
I
understand
the
concerns
from
law
enforcement
concerns
from
district
attorneys,
but
in
all
candor.
I
believe,
based
on
my
experience,
that
clarity
is
actually
going
to
make
the
situation
better
rather
than
worse.
I
think,
by
making
clear
what
is
abuse
and
neglect
you
take
some
inconsistency
out
of
the
enforcement.
S
You
provide
direction
to
the
officers
to
get
the
bad
people
that
need
to
be
got
while
not
going
after
some
people
that
perhaps
should
not
be
captured
that
are
being
captured
right
now
because
of
the
vague
language.
Again,
it's
written
in
terms
of
may
or
may
put
a
child
in
a
position
where
something
could
happen.
That
is
so
vague
that
I
couldn't
give
much
direction
on
how
this
works
earlier.
Senator
pickard
asked
if
these
things
would
strike
a
balance.
I
think
that
the
language
that
they
proposed
does
strike
a
balance.
H
S
Talked
about
it
being
reasonable,
I
think
the
solution
is
reasonable.
It
provides
some
direction
and
clarity
for
folks.
So,
for
all
those
reasons
we
are
in
support
of
the
bill
and
I
don't
think
the
practical
effect
is
going
to
be
losing
any
people
that
that
might
be
captured
right
now
that
are
doing
the
bad
stuff.
The
child
abuse
neglect
so
we're
fully
in
support
of
the
bill.
A
All
right,
thank
you,
so
much
just
to
make
sure
that
our
record
is
clear
and
for
the
benefit
of
our
secretaries,
work
so
hard
to
take
accurate
minutes.
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
ms
khanasi's
testimony
recorded
in
the
support
category.
A
Mr
armstrong,
in
the
neutral
category,
mr
d,
lap
in
opposition
and
mr
coffee
in
support
and
given
the
apparent
technical
difficulties,
I
am
also
going
to
open
up
the
phone
lines
one
more
time
for
anybody
wishing
to
testify.
This
is
not
our
usual
practice,
but
for
this
hearing
only
since
there
appears
to
have
been
an
issue,
I
will
open
the
phone
lines
for
anybody
to
testify
in
any
position
and
you
will
still
be
limited
to
two
minutes,
and
hopefully
there
are
not
too
many
people
who
fall
into
that
category.
L
A
Okay,
good
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
heard
from
everybody
and
that
will
conclude
the
hearing
on
sb
143.
I
see
a.
A
Senator
pickard,
I
think
now
is
a
good
time
just
to
I'm
not
sure
what
you're
going
to
say.
If
there's
a
question
for
someone,
who's
specifically
testified
I'll.
Ask
that
you
follow
up
with
them
offline,
and
you
can
always
ask
me,
or
our
committee
manager
for
that
person's
contact
information.
If
it's
a
comment
on
the
bill
or
a
question
for
somebody
who's
still
on
this
call,
please
go
ahead.
Senator.
G
Yeah,
no,
I
appreciate
that
that
church
I
will.
I
was
just
wondering
because
all
of
the
well-
not
all
but
the
the
the
people
in
the
know
the
the
prosecutors
particularly
miss
duffy
and
and
mr
jones
spoke
about.
You
know
we're
moving
in
the
right
direction.
We've
got
some
problems
with
the
language
and
the
unintended
consequences,
but
we
never
really
heard
what
those
are.
What
the
proposed
language
might
be,
and
I
would
be
very
interested
to
hear
if
you
know
we're
not
too
far
off.
A
I
appreciate
the
question:
it
sounds
like
something
you
can
discuss
with
the
sponsor
offline
or
perhaps
with
those
agencies
who
called
in
to
testify
in
opposition
with
that.
Do
the
sponsors
of
the
bill
or
the
bill
presenters
have
any
final
comments
or
clarifications
they'd
like
to
make.
C
I
can't
cherish,
I
will
just
make
one
last
statement.
I
just
want
to
thank
everyone
who
who
has
been
a
part
of
of
this,
this
labor
of
love-
and
you
know
I'll
just
close
by
saying
anything
that
gets
myself
and
a
assemblywoman
hanson
on
the
same
side-
is
either
a
really
really
good
idea
or
a
really
really
bad
one,
and
I
hope
that
we've
convinced
you
all
that
it's
the
former.
A
Thank
you
senator
harris
and
that
will
actually
conclude
the
hearing
on
sb
143.
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
sb
143
that
takes
us
to
the
last
item
on
our
agenda.
Public
comment.