[12:51] rightenate judiciary will come
[12:51] to order
[12:54] today we have interim
[12:58] study2026-51 Senator Hicks for
[13:00] supervised visitation safety and
[13:02] accountability appreciate you
[13:04] bringing this study forward. I
[13:04] know that there's been some
[13:06] issues including one issue
[13:08] within my district's hometown
[13:10] even as to what supervised
[13:12] custody would look at. So I look
[13:14] forward to the information
[13:14] Senator Hicks what I'll
[13:16] typically do is just turn it
[13:17] over to you for introduction of
[13:19] your study brief overview and
[13:20] then you can go straight into
[13:22] the introduction of your
[13:22] speakers
[13:24] whether you want to follow
[13:25] agenda I think that that
[13:26] probably would be best still
[13:28] willll direct any questions
[13:30] through the chair or vice chair
[13:32] but if you have any of those
[13:36] we'd be happy to honor you for
[13:38] or recognize you for asking
[13:40] those questions as well soen
[13:42] Hicks microphones turned over to
[13:44] you for introduction of your
[13:44] study and then going straight
[13:45] into the introduction of your
[13:46] speakers.
[13:48] thank you Mr Chair and thank you
[13:52] so much for all my colleagues
[13:54] joining us today thank you to
[13:54] those of you who made time to be
[13:56] here in person for this very
[13:57] important issue
[14:00] today's study will examine
[14:02] Oklahoma's current framework for
[14:02] court-ordered supervised
[14:04] visitation including the
[14:06] existing standards training
[14:07] safety protocols and
[14:08] accountability measures we'll
[14:10] also hear from judges child
[14:12] welfare professionals victim
[14:14] advocates, service providers
[14:16] legal experts and a family
[14:16] directly affected by supervised
[14:17] visitation.
[14:20] our goal is to better understand
[14:21] how supervised visitation
[14:23] operates in Oklahomaview
[14:24] national practices and identify
[14:26] opportunities to strengthen
[14:28] safety, consistency and
[14:30] accountability for children and
[14:32] families. now we are ready to
[14:33] hear from our very first
[14:34] presenter the honornorable
[14:37] Kim conyers, special judged from
[14:37] judicial District w1.
[14:48] s ome this is my first time on
[14:49] this side of the microphone I
[14:49] think.
[14:52] it's red is that correct? OK
[14:54] perfect right well as Senator
[14:56] Hicks said my name is Kim
[14:57] conyers and I am a special
[14:58] judged in Cleveland County. I've
[15:00] been on the bench there coming
[15:02] up on about 3 years now. My
[15:04] dockets in Cleveland County
[15:08] are exclusively dealing with the
[15:09] children's cases in Cleveland
[15:10] County so I have the juvenile
[15:12] deprived docket which is where
[15:13] children have been placed in DhS
[15:15] custody. I would also have the
[15:17] juvenile delinquent docket which
[15:18] is where children have gotten
[15:19] charged with offenses and then
[15:23] I also do our adoption as well
[15:26] as our adult and juvenile mental
[15:27] health dockets in Cleveland
[15:27] County.
[15:30] so my experience with supervised
[15:34] visitation comes from the DHS
[15:36] side of things when a child is
[15:40] placed in DHS custody and
[15:42] that that case is going to
[15:44] proceed through court the one of
[15:46] the things that we address at
[15:48] every hearing is what type of
[15:50] visitation how frequent the
[15:52] visitation is and what that
[15:54] looks like for the parents
[15:55] involved in the case
[15:57] so in my courtroom the way that
[15:58] I have typically handled it is
[16:02] all of the parents are
[16:03] represented by an attorney as
[16:04] well as the child has an
[16:06] attorney and sometimes we have a
[16:08] guardian ad lite or other folks
[16:11] involved as well. I typically at
[16:14] our review hearings will take
[16:16] just brief statements from all
[16:18] the parties including my DHS
[16:20] worker as to what would be in
[16:22] the best interest of the child
[16:24] how things are progressing in
[16:25] the case in terms of
[16:27] the services the parents have
[16:29] established themselves in or the
[16:32] progress that they've made to
[16:33] work those services while the
[16:36] child has been in DHS custody.
[16:40] It is up to DHS specifically
[16:42] to organize and establish a
[16:44] visitation or what they call a
[16:46] family time plan and then the
[16:48] court has the discretion to to
[16:51] modify that or make changes to
[16:54] it as I see fit as the case is
[16:55] progressing along
[16:58] most of the time what happens
[17:00] is the DHS worker will report
[17:02] here's kind of the progress the
[17:02] parents have made on their
[17:04] services herere's kind of how
[17:06] visits are going up into this
[17:08] point and this is what we the
[17:10] step we'd like to progress to
[17:12] next. It starts with a
[17:14] supervised plan that is
[17:16] supervised either by a DHS
[17:18] worker or sometimes a DHS
[17:21] employee or sometimes an
[17:23] appropriate family member a lot
[17:24] of times if children are placed
[17:25] say in
[17:28] the grandparents' home or with a
[17:30] family friend that person can be
[17:32] approved by the department to be
[17:33] the visitation supervisor
[17:38] after supervised visitation
[17:40] it steps down to what they call
[17:44] monitored visitation which is
[17:46] a lowerle obviously of
[17:48] supervision where DHS and other
[17:52] supervisors kind of come in
[17:54] and out during a visitation so
[17:55] they're not there the entire
[17:56] time but they check in during
[17:58] that twoho visit for instance.
[18:00] and then from there it moves
[18:04] to unsupervised to overnights
[18:05] and then usually to
[18:10] maybe weekends before then it
[18:10] moves into
[18:13] the stage of trial reunification
[18:14] which is kind of the final stage
[18:17] of we're still involved in the
[18:19] family's life but the child is
[18:21] essentially living back in the
[18:22] residence with one or both of
[18:23] the parents at that point in
[18:24] time.
[18:27] so that's kind of what I look at
[18:30] and I I'm a big believer that
[18:33] my decisions from the bench are
[18:36] better and are better for the
[18:39] family the more information I
[18:42] have. I I don't there's a lot
[18:44] that goes on outside of my
[18:46] courtroom with these families
[18:48] and my hope my goal is to get as
[18:50] much information from the
[18:52] participants in the case as I
[18:54] can while I'm sitting on the
[18:54] bench in order to make the most
[18:58] informed choice as to what's in
[18:59] the best interest of these
[18:59] children
[19:00] hicks
[19:06] thank you Mr chairir. when
[19:06] you're talking about the
[19:08] information that you have
[19:10] available is there what does
[19:12] the documentation look like that
[19:14] you're provided from DHS Is
[19:16] there a standardized form? there
[19:20] is there is a standardized form
[19:22] that they submit um5 days prior
[19:24] to any review hearing that is a
[19:28] review report and it documents
[19:30] what progress the parents
[19:32] have made on services and what
[19:33] visit
[19:35] ation looks like in terms of how
[19:36] things have gone, you know have
[19:38] they exercised the full time of
[19:40] visitation? have there been any
[19:41] you know
[19:44] hiccups or anything go wrong
[19:47] during the last review period in
[19:48] addition to that they also a lot
[19:52] of times will attach reports
[19:54] from the actual service
[19:56] providers to those review
[19:57] reports. So I'm seeing an actual
[19:59] report for instance from the
[20:02] parentsug and alcohol counselor
[20:04] or I'm seeing the actual
[20:06] psychological evaluation that
[20:08] was court ordered for a parent
[20:09] to participate in.
[20:13] and not just me but the other
[20:15] attorneys involved in the case
[20:16] have access to that
[20:17] documentation and information as
[20:17] well.
[20:21] Further questions
[20:26] Judge conyers said think
[20:26] whenever you're doing an
[20:28] introduction you said just
[20:29] during DHS custody are the only
[20:30] ones that you supervise is this
[20:32] also during ok they are my my
[20:36] cases are strictly the cases
[20:38] on the juvenile deprived docket
[20:39] which is children that have for
[20:40] whatever reason been placed in
[20:43] DHS custody or are under DHS
[20:46] supervision if they if it hasn't
[20:48] risen to the level of us taking
[20:49] the children into actual DhS
[20:49] custody.
[20:53] Is there much review whenever
[20:56] it's just a family dispute like
[20:57] say a divorce or other
[20:59] situations for sure you I'll let
[21:01] judgedge Byeer speak directly to
[21:04] that. My experience has been
[21:06] with those that I do have a
[21:10] handful of paternity cases that
[21:12] involve some of that but my
[21:13] experience typically with those
[21:16] has been it is up to the the
[21:19] parties involved and the judged
[21:20] how frequently they feel like
[21:21] it's
[21:23] necessary or warranted to review
[21:23] those
[21:28] type of of situations typically
[21:30] in deprived cases I can go as
[21:32] long as6 months without holding
[21:34] a review. most of the cases that
[21:38] I hear we review at a minimum
[21:40] every 90 days and then I have a
[21:42] standing policy in my courtroom
[21:44] that all of the attorneys are
[21:46] familiar with that is if
[21:47] anything needs to be brought to
[21:47] the court's attention
[21:51] you contact my office we put
[21:52] it on a review docket
[21:53] immediately and you get in front
[21:55] of me on my next wednesday
[21:55] docket
[22:00] Further questions Senator Hicks
[22:01] should recognize
[22:06] thank you Mr Chair. So kind
[22:06] of in preparation we had a
[22:09] conversation before today's
[22:10] study and so I understand that
[22:12] Oklahoma County has kind of a
[22:13] unique
[22:16] team effort so I was wondering
[22:18] if you might be able to to share
[22:20] kind of what that looks like
[22:22] that's provided through the
[22:24] statutes that you may be able to
[22:26] have this kind of I will
[22:27] actually turn that over to Judge
[22:29] Byer to speak about Cleveland
[22:30] County does not have any such
[22:32] thing in place that I'm aware of
[22:34] at this point in time.
[22:36] certainly not for the
[22:39] deprived cases I will say I I
[22:40] noticed on the agenda that a
[22:42] representative from the
[22:43] familypresentation Act
[22:46] is scheduled as well that's been
[22:48] one of the biggest benefits that
[22:50] I have seen in my courtroom is
[22:53] utilizing that because I have
[22:56] the same pool of attorneys who
[22:58] were taking court appointments
[23:00] in cases and on one case they
[23:02] might represent mom and on the
[23:03] next case on my docket they have
[23:05] the children and so it gives
[23:08] them a broad perspective of
[23:11] these cases and also allows them
[23:12] to develop working relationships
[23:13] with one another
[23:16] and with the district attorney's
[23:17] office said that that
[23:17] information sharing is
[23:22] a lot easier and it happens
[23:23] outside of my courtroom in
[23:24] between those lawyers that
[23:26] they're able to make sure
[23:28] nothing's falling between the
[23:29] cracks and make sure those kids
[23:30] and families are getting all the
[23:31] attention that they need
[23:38] musteralhart you're recognized
[23:39] for a question
[23:40] your honornor's
[23:43] how has Leo's law impacted your
[23:43] court
[23:53] can't say that for Cleveland
[23:54] County I can't say that it has
[23:56] in in that great of a we are
[23:58] really really lucky in Cleveland
[23:59] County with the group of lawyers
[24:00] and kind of the court system
[24:02] that was in place before I took
[24:05] over the bench so I I can't
[24:06] say that that it has
[24:06] specifically
[24:12] Senator Hicks you're recognized
[24:12] for your next speaker on the
[24:13] agenda.
[24:16] thank you so much Mr Chair and
[24:17] thank you judgedge conyers for
[24:18] joining us today. I apologize
[24:20] that I got Cleveland County
[24:24] confused but with that it's the
[24:26] perfect segue into our next
[24:28] presenter the honorableharron
[24:30] Byer who is the special judged
[24:32] in judicial district seven here
[24:33] in Oklahoma County.
[24:34] thank you
[24:39] I'm Sharon Byeers I'm a special
[24:40] district judged in Oklahoma
[24:42] County. I sit on the family and
[24:46] domestic floor. so unlike Judge
[24:48] conyers, I don't deal with cases
[24:52] that are in deprived actions
[24:54] ideal all in family law court
[24:58] so divorce paternity and then
[25:00] modifications of those orders
[25:04] we're very fortunate that we
[25:06] have a state statute that deals
[25:09] with supervised visitation we do
[25:14] initle43 section 110.1a and the
[25:15] legislature has set out
[25:18] some guidelines for us that I
[25:19] don't know that
[25:22] that they have in juvenile
[25:22] court. I have not
[25:26] haven't really practiced in
[25:27] juvenile court nor have I been a
[25:29] judge in juvenile court but we
[25:32] do have a supervised visitation
[25:34] program by statute that is run
[25:36] by the associate district judged
[25:38] for the county who happens to be
[25:40] here with me today uhjudge
[25:42] Singleton and she has developed
[25:48] practices to comply with the
[25:49] statute so we have
[25:54] unfortunately when you get into
[25:54] family court, we do not have a
[25:56] lot of the services that are
[25:59] available for children who are
[26:02] in DHS custody and so we have to
[26:02] rely upon
[26:03] other
[26:06] things
[26:06] and
[26:10] we don't get DHS services now we
[26:11] will have
[26:14] we can get reports from DHS what
[26:14] happened if the children
[26:16] happened to be in the deprived
[26:18] action and then once that is
[26:19] dismissed they'll come into
[26:19] family court
[26:22] and so we can get that
[26:24] information but we don't have
[26:26] those services available. I
[26:26] think that's probably part of
[26:28] the reason why the legislature
[26:30] and developed a supervised
[26:34] visitation program and so we
[26:36] have people who can volunteer as
[26:37] supervisors after they go
[26:38] through a background check and
[26:40] fill out an application we can
[26:41] develop a team which we have
[26:44] started to do in Oklahoma County
[26:48] and to develop protocol and
[26:50] training and various things so
[26:52] that we keep our kids as safe as
[26:54] we possibly can under the
[26:56] time that they are in
[26:56] supervision
[26:58] so
[27:00] I don't know if you want me to
[27:02] say some more or if you have any
[27:03] questions
[27:08] Sener heck should recognize
[27:09] thank you Mr Chair. will you
[27:11] read the statute just so that
[27:11] we have that in the record.
[27:12] the entire statute
[27:16] for follow up
[27:20] we do have a submitted so I mean
[27:22] it's it can be just put into
[27:23] exhibit we don't have to read it
[27:25] in its entirety perfect I
[27:25] think
[27:28] more intentionally would you
[27:30] speak to the part that is
[27:32] allowed Oklahoma County to be
[27:32] able to develop the team
[27:34] situations that you're that you
[27:35] all are working on
[27:39] well inokklahoma County we have5
[27:40] judges who are assigned to the
[27:43] family and domestic division and
[27:44] so Judge Singleton got us
[27:48] together and talked to us about
[27:50] developing a team and then we
[27:52] could create some subcommittees
[27:54] to start working on the various
[27:58] aspects of getting together
[28:02] training and a manual for best
[28:04] practices and various thingsrior
[28:05] to that judgedge
[28:06] Singleton was
[28:08] singlehandedly
[28:12] sending you know sending out
[28:12] applications for people who are
[28:14] interested getting them to get
[28:16] their background checks and
[28:17] going through
[28:20] the qualifications and then
[28:22] creating a list so we have a
[28:23] list in Oklahoma County of the
[28:24] people who have been qualified
[28:26] to serve as supervisors
[28:30] but we are actively pursuing
[28:33] other avenues to make it better
[28:36] Did I answer your question
[28:38] I think one thing that
[28:40] makes it
[28:44] easier for Oklahoma County is
[28:46] the population and the number of
[28:48] people I think unfortunately
[28:49] when you
[28:52] get to other counties that have
[28:54] a smaller population less
[28:56] judges, less service providers I
[28:56] mean we're very fortunate in
[28:58] Oklahoma County that we have
[29:00] there's a supervised visitation
[29:02] facility people who are
[29:04] interested in doing supervision
[29:06] and places in public that those
[29:09] can actually take place so we
[29:12] have the manpower to do some
[29:13] really great things and to
[29:15] comply with the statute that may
[29:18] not be available to other places
[29:19] where the population is
[29:21] less
[29:26] Judge, thank you for being here
[29:27] today
[29:28] on these so in the family law
[29:32] cases those that you see are the
[29:34] supervised visitations the
[29:34] result of judged's own
[29:38] review or does that to be
[29:38] brought forward by one of the
[29:40] parties to the the matter is it
[29:43] a recommendation by DHS is there
[29:44] quarter appointed special
[29:46] advocates that come in and
[29:47] initially recommend this how
[29:48] does it how does it get
[29:48] initiated?
[29:52] we don't have DHS in our courts
[29:53] and we don't have court
[29:54] appointed special advocates
[29:58] those are all in juvenile courts
[30:00] so it usually comes to our
[30:00] attention by a parent filing
[30:01] something
[30:04] whether that's an application
[30:06] for an emergency custody order
[30:07] or at the beginning of a case
[30:07] before you
[30:12] get fully into it parties can
[30:13] ask for a temporary order
[30:14] hearing which is exactly what it
[30:15] sounds like that's a temporary
[30:16] order that's in place until you
[30:20] can do discovery and get to to
[30:22] the final order so they'll
[30:22] oftentimes come in on a
[30:23] temporary order hearing
[30:26] very early on in the case and
[30:30] then either parents will ask for
[30:32] supervised visitation or as a
[30:33] judge you're hearing what the
[30:34] issues are and the things going
[30:36] on and at that point
[30:40] you will order I'll order
[30:42] supervised visitation. It
[30:43] usually comes along with the
[30:44] appointment of a guardian ad
[30:46] litem so we since we don't have
[30:48] casa and we can appoint
[30:50] guardians ad litem to come in
[30:52] and help with an investigation
[30:54] and so we'll do supervised
[30:56] visitation while we're doing an
[30:58] investigation to ensure the
[30:59] safety of children and just like
[31:00] judgedge conyers the more
[31:02] information I can have the
[31:05] better. I want information from
[31:06] all sources if there's prior
[31:07] juvenile
[31:10] contacts, I want the information
[31:12] from the juvenile court. I want
[31:13] we oftentimes have
[31:16] workers from DHS come in and
[31:18] testify about their previous
[31:20] investigation and various things
[31:20] of that nature so that we know
[31:21] that we're
[31:24] protecting children as much as
[31:25] we can.
[31:32] I imagine most of the family law
[31:34] cases become very adversarial.
[31:36] do you see that the process gets
[31:42] overused or bludgeons used as
[31:44] a bludgeon to make
[31:44] allegations that then have to be
[31:48] substantiated or do you think
[31:50] that most of this is really just
[31:50] in the best interest of children
[31:52] as it gets brought forward to
[31:53] you by one of the parties
[32:00] I think that's a hard question
[32:02] to answer it's very
[32:03] adversarial yes
[32:06] but
[32:08] the safety of children is of
[32:10] utmost importance so if we have
[32:12] to have some supervised
[32:14] visitation while we're
[32:16] investigating it. I would rather
[32:16] be safe than sorry. I'd rather
[32:18] the children be protected
[32:22] so I wouldn't say that it's
[32:24] overused. I mean is there a time
[32:25] that
[32:28] sometimes that people abuse the
[32:29] system
[32:29] sure
[32:33] I don't think that that is the
[32:33] norm
[32:34] I think
[32:40] oftentimes people will come
[32:40] before me and they're just
[32:42] talking about the daily lives
[32:44] and things that happen and they
[32:45] haven't asked for supervised
[32:48] visitation but the things that
[32:48] they're telling me that they
[32:52] think are normal are telling me
[32:53] that there's a safety risk here
[32:53] and
[32:56] maybe not all parents recognize
[33:00] the safety risk because they're
[33:01] so far into
[33:06] whatever's happening that that
[33:06] has become their norm so
[33:11] I feel like I see that more than
[33:12] you people using it as a
[33:12] weapon
[33:16] en er hicks
[33:22] thank you Mr Chair and so on on
[33:23] the team that you guys are
[33:25] developing are there child
[33:27] development experts that are
[33:30] present or that are our lending
[33:34] expertise on the impact to the
[33:36] children based on the court's
[33:37] recommendations or the court's
[33:37] orders
[33:42] we are inviting those people in
[33:42] that's what the statute
[33:46] provides for that they can sit
[33:48] on those teams so we have an
[33:50] informational meeting coming up
[33:51] and then we were going to invite
[33:51] more and more people into it
[33:57] one final question from the
[33:58] chair unless there's others from
[34:00] the committee and this is for
[34:02] you judged as well as Judge
[34:03] conyers if she wants to come
[34:04] back are there policy
[34:06] recommendations that you see
[34:08] being the ones that implement
[34:09] this at the trial judge level
[34:09] that the legislature needs to
[34:10] look at
[34:14] for streamlining and or further
[34:14] protection of children that are
[34:17] in supervised or should be in
[34:17] supervised sup
[34:19] visitation programs
[34:23] are you asking me if I have
[34:23] policy recommendations today
[34:28] or would be able to develop some
[34:28] you or Judge conyers
[34:32] think we would be happy to
[34:34] develop policy recommendations
[34:34] with the team. I didn't bring
[34:35] any with me today but
[34:40] I'm happy to reach back out and
[34:41] with any policy recommendations
[34:46] en ator Hicks on to the next
[34:50] thank you Mr Chair and thank you
[34:53] so much to both of you all for
[34:54] lending your time I know that
[34:56] there were some dockets that had
[34:57] to be moved around and so I
[34:58] really appreciate you all
[35:00] spending time with us today as
[35:02] we maybe just me learn
[35:06] more about the judicial side of
[35:08] this very important issue and
[35:10] next we have Megannorurk
[35:12] who's the deputy deputy director
[35:14] of child welfare programs from
[35:15] DHS.
[35:20] ed's on correct? OK I did
[35:22] have some slides I don't know if
[35:23] we wanted to pull those up or
[35:24] it's ok if not
[35:52] we had 3 that were sent in and
[35:52] that was this office of
[35:54] familymily representation the
[35:55] attorney general's office and
[35:56] YWCA no problem did you have
[35:58] others those are not it's ok we
[35:59] will pivot
[36:01] right we may proceed
[36:06] again thank you for having us
[36:08] and inviting DHS to the table
[36:10] today to talk about this topic
[36:12] I just want to reiterate the
[36:12] information I'm here to share
[36:15] today share today pertains to
[36:18] children who are removed have
[36:20] been placed in DHS custody or
[36:22] have come to the attention of
[36:23] the department as needing some
[36:24] sort of intervention whether
[36:27] that's prevention services or
[36:27] supervision cases
[36:32] to start off with family time
[36:34] is definitely a right of the
[36:36] child and the family
[36:40] heritleinny statute the DHS
[36:42] is responsible for implementing
[36:44] a family time plan within se
[36:48] days of removal within those
[36:52] 1st 90 days at minimum a visit
[36:53] occurs with the child and their
[36:55] family one time per week the
[36:57] frequency of that is definitely
[36:57] subject to change pending
[37:00] any court orders and things of
[37:01] that nature.
[37:04] after 90 days those visits go to
[37:06] a minimum of two visits each
[37:08] month but again there's
[37:10] always exceptions for frequency
[37:12] that could be the parent
[37:14] doesn't isn't participating or
[37:16] unable to locate that parent
[37:18] there could be a court order
[37:20] potentially impacting family
[37:22] time it could be in the
[37:24] child's safety or best interests
[37:28] to have a redi reduction in
[37:30] family time or even an increase
[37:31] a lot of times our infant
[37:33] s when they're removed right
[37:36] after birth we do see
[37:36] increase in family time for that
[37:40] bonding with the parent if
[37:41] the permanency plan is different
[37:44] than reunification that too can
[37:46] impact the frequency of family
[37:48] time meaning if we have a case
[37:49] that comes to our attention
[37:50] and it's shocking and heinous
[37:52] and the DA is seeking
[37:54] straight termination that could
[37:54] also impact frequency of family
[37:55] time.
[37:58] I think it's important to
[38:00] note just kind of where we're at
[38:02] as a state you heard
[38:04] judgement mention family time
[38:04] we used to call it visitation
[38:08] and in2020 we had DHS
[38:10] leadership actually seek out
[38:14] nationally and talked to a judge
[38:16] in Georgia and they
[38:18] reimplemented the way that they
[38:18] think about visits when you
[38:20] think about visits maybe you
[38:22] think about a hospital setting
[38:24] you think about prison things of
[38:24] that nature. familymily time
[38:25] should encompass
[38:28] a special moment between a
[38:30] parent and a child to really
[38:32] emphasize that bonding and so
[38:33] the state of Oklahoma decided to
[38:34] rebrand. we shifted from
[38:36] visitation to family time and
[38:38] our court partners you know
[38:40] other community folks have
[38:42] definitely come on board with us
[38:43] in this shift
[38:46] family time can impact the
[38:47] child's wellbeing. it's
[38:48] essential to their immediate and
[38:52] long term connection when you
[38:53] think about connecting with
[38:54] their their siblings with
[38:56] their parents grandparents. I
[38:58] think the most important thing
[39:00] to note too about family time
[39:01] and is that it's driven by
[39:04] safety anytime we are looking
[39:06] for a different level in
[39:08] supervision. safety is our
[39:10] driving factor we're looking at
[39:12] parents' protective capacities
[39:13] what has changed since that
[39:13] time
[39:16] of removal are we seeing a
[39:19] correction and do we feel
[39:20] comfortable making that
[39:20] recommendation to the court for
[39:22] that next level of least
[39:23] restrictive family time.
[39:26] it's also important to note too
[39:28] that each family is an
[39:30] individualized family. It could
[39:32] look different from case to case
[39:34] while you might have two
[39:36] families removed for the same
[39:38] situation the dynamics are
[39:40] different. there's many case
[39:41] complexities that go into that
[39:42] and so each recommendation to
[39:44] the court for the level of
[39:46] family time should be thoughtful
[39:48] and based and sound safety
[39:49] decision making.
[39:54] so you heard our judgement
[39:54] the different levels of
[39:56] supervisioni too was going to
[39:58] go over that a little bit we
[40:00] do have a matrix I think our
[40:02] most important family time
[40:04] level to point out is
[40:08] therapeutic and that is the the
[40:10] most restrictive and therapeutic
[40:12] is really for those families or
[40:13] maybe the youth doesn't want to
[40:16] see their parents or there was
[40:16] something that happened at the
[40:18] time of removal that was very
[40:19] traumatic and we need a
[40:19] therapist
[40:22] present thank you thank you I'm
[40:23] sorry
[40:26] let me just go ahead and skip
[40:28] then to this matrix so you guys
[40:28] can see it
[40:31] it's very small. OK sorry
[40:32] about that. Well again this
[40:35] kind of walks backwards so from
[40:36] the right we're at therapeutic
[40:38] which is the most restrictive.
[40:40] this is where you have a
[40:42] therapist present. this is gene
[40:44] generally where you will see
[40:46] family counseling. we are
[40:46] following the recommendation of
[40:50] that child's therapist to
[40:52] really reintroduce that
[40:54] relationship with the parents.
[40:56] it's very rare that you might
[40:58] see therapeutic family time
[40:58] or counsel
[41:02] ing or family counseling just
[41:03] because it does have to be done
[41:04] by a professional
[41:08] you then have supervised again
[41:09] that's where someone is
[41:10] constantly watching the family
[41:12] they can hear what's going on,
[41:14] they can see what's going on.
[41:16] we have observed you have
[41:18] someone who can see but they
[41:20] might not be hearing everything
[41:24] so we are at a park and I can
[41:26] visually see what's occurring. I
[41:26] can't hear everything but I'm
[41:28] comfortable in knowing that that
[41:30] child is safe with that parent
[41:32] in that situation. you have a
[41:34] monitored so that could be where
[41:35] the monitor
[41:37] comes by the home, the child is
[41:38] brought to the parent's house
[41:40] the monitor stays for 30
[41:44] minutes.ing is fine arent has
[41:44] unsupervised time with that
[41:48] child for a brief period of time
[41:48] and then the monitor comes back
[41:50] and ensures everything is ok and
[41:52] then you have unsupervised
[41:54] and again that's where you can
[41:57] have overnights they take them
[42:00] for extended amounts of time and
[42:02] we have done a level of safety
[42:04] assessment at every supervision
[42:05] level to
[42:06] ensure that it is the most
[42:07] appropriate for that child
[42:11] so you heard me mention monitor
[42:12] and so I just kind of wanted
[42:15] to go over this a little bit a a
[42:17] monitor could be a family member
[42:19] someone who knows the family
[42:22] who we trust they can
[42:24] recognize what a safety threat
[42:26] is. they know the reason why the
[42:28] children came into care they
[42:28] feel comfortable with
[42:30] intervening if something does
[42:34] come up within that time they
[42:35] know how to manage that they are
[42:37] a trusted partner generally this
[42:37] would be someone who comes to
[42:38] our family meeting
[42:40] s who knows about the case plan,
[42:44] case progression, what we're
[42:46] asking from the parent to get to
[42:48] the point of reunification. They
[42:50] are a partner at the table
[42:50] and very aware of everything
[42:52] that's going on with the case.
[42:54] They also have to have their
[42:56] background screened we have
[42:58] their child welfare checks we
[43:01] have a background check done. we
[43:03] know that we trust this person
[43:05] to help us monitor the family
[43:05] time
[43:08] and they also support the
[43:10] parents. We want to monitor that
[43:12] can give coaching and feedback
[43:14] in a safe environment so that
[43:16] the parent knows behaviors and
[43:17] things like that that maybe they
[43:18] could improve upon for the next
[43:19] family time setting
[43:24] I did do a s a slide
[43:26] specifically over therapeutic
[43:27] family time cause I did notice
[43:28] this was on the agenda and I
[43:30] just wanted to point out that it
[43:32] is with a professional or
[43:34] clinical therapeutic
[43:36] expertise who's supervising play
[43:38] therapy, family counseling
[43:39] that's where you're going to see
[43:42] this. this is all dependent
[43:44] on capacity I think you
[43:46] mentioned rural so I think it
[43:48] just depends on what services
[43:50] are available in that county
[43:54] where they have the ability to
[43:54] also do therapeutic family time.
[43:58] and that is all I have any
[43:59] questions?
[44:02] you recognized for your question
[44:06] thank you Mr Chair. so on the
[44:08] designation of monitor. what is
[44:10] that the standard iss there
[44:12] training support guidance help
[44:14] me understand if if someone's
[44:16] entrusted to monitor a
[44:18] supervised visitation what does
[44:20] DHS except as a responsibility
[44:23] to prepare that monitor for yes
[44:24] for children in care when we're
[44:28] looking for a monitor. this
[44:30] is typically a family member if
[44:32] we're trying to have more
[44:32] frequent family time generally
[44:34] the place that we want to look
[44:36] to first are the parents
[44:38] supports so it could be a family
[44:38] member or neighbor or someone
[44:40] like that we need to have
[44:42] someone who understands what the
[44:44] safety threat was if they're not
[44:44] acknowledging that there could
[44:48] potentially be another
[44:48] instance or something like that
[44:50] that's something we're going to
[44:52] take into consideration.
[44:54] there's not training per se
[44:56] however, when we are developing
[44:58] a family time plan roles and
[45:00] responsibilities are listed out
[45:02] in that family time plan and so
[45:03] that monitor should walk away
[45:06] fully understanding what their
[45:08] role is in family time and what
[45:08] to do if something were to
[45:12] happen it's a team effort so
[45:15] we have family time or family
[45:18] meetings every60 to 90 days we
[45:18] should be reviewing that family
[45:21] time plan at every family
[45:22] meeting so if something needs to
[45:24] be changed if we need to look at
[45:26] the level of supervision if we
[45:28] have a different recommendation
[45:30] that whole team is discussing it
[45:32] in that moment. perfect time for
[45:33] the monitor to say hey
[45:36] I need some help or can you
[45:38] please help guide me on
[45:40] something else and then that
[45:40] team can support that monitor
[45:41] for next steps
[45:44] hicks for a follow up
[45:48] thank you Mr Chair so
[45:52] I mean again on the monitor's
[45:52] roles and responsibilities and
[45:54] your you're listing out that
[45:58] oftentimes you look close to
[45:58] family members neighbors someone
[46:00] who's close to that child and I
[46:02] understand from kind of a child
[46:02] development perspective why that
[46:04] would be important do you feel
[46:07] like that offers any conflict of
[46:08] interest in really being able to
[46:10] monitor the situation
[46:11] effectively for the safety of
[46:13] the child. I don't know that
[46:14] there's a conflict of interest
[46:15] but we do have family who
[46:15] sometimes
[46:18] comes forward and says I'm not
[46:18] comfortable doing this because
[46:20] I'm related to this family
[46:22] member and they don't want to
[46:24] cause a strain on that
[46:26] relationship which we completely
[46:28] understand if that's the case
[46:30] then we we kind of move around
[46:32] maybe how we're going to do this
[46:33] the monitor could also be the
[46:36] worker so the worker could come
[46:36] by check in with the family.
[46:38] they are trained professionals
[46:40] who know what to look for in
[46:43] terms of safety looking outside
[46:44] for a monitor like a family
[46:45] member is just another
[46:47] way to maybe make the parent and
[46:49] the family feel comfortable
[46:50] but again if that's not
[46:52] something that the family wishes
[46:54] to do then the responsibility
[46:55] does come back to DHS to find
[46:55] another way.
[46:58] hicks for a follow up
[47:00] thank you Mr Chair and so in
[47:01] that
[47:05] scenario it is completely
[47:06] reliant upon whoever's been
[47:09] asked to be the monitor to be
[47:11] forthcoming is that correct
[47:12] correct the the family
[47:15] identifies and we have that
[47:16] conversation and if they are not
[47:18] in the position of wanting to do
[47:21] that or can then the agency will
[47:21] find a different solution.
[47:25] hicks for a follow up
[47:28] thank you Mr Chair. So I guess
[47:30] I'm just trying to draw out that
[47:31] that there's a potential for
[47:31] potential
[47:36] coercion possibly that if an
[47:38] individual is close to those
[47:39] children and wants to make good
[47:40] decisions on behalf of the
[47:42] children and their close with
[47:44] the family member that has to be
[47:47] monitored or supervised do you
[47:48] see that that that could
[47:50] possibly work against the best
[47:52] interests of the safety of the
[47:54] child. I don't don't believe it
[47:56] impacts the safety of the child
[47:59] the agency when we are going
[48:00] out and doing our worker visits
[48:01] we have to check in with the
[48:01] monitor weekly we
[48:04] are discussing safety so if
[48:05] there were any
[48:09] red flags or concerns about that
[48:11] child's safety the worker would
[48:13] be investigating that and in
[48:14] those conversations that we're
[48:15] having on a weekly basis with
[48:15] monitors
[48:16] hicks
[48:20] thank you Mr Cha. so what is the
[48:24] typical workload of a
[48:28] caseworker they are assigned 1f
[48:30] children for permanency planning
[48:34] cases so give or take with
[48:36] siblings you're looking at
[48:38] maybe7 to 8 cases but it does
[48:40] vary but we can definitely get
[48:40] some some facts for you
[48:42] but it's 1f children for
[48:43] assignment
[48:46] further questions
[48:52] just to follow up so the
[48:54] recommendation by the monitor is
[48:54] just that a recommendation that
[48:56] then goes into a report by DHS
[48:58] I'm sure that that's compared
[49:00] with maybeassa is this where
[49:02] casa would be involved and then
[49:06] the judge takes recommendations
[49:08] reports from DHSassa direct
[49:10] testimony before making any
[49:10] further determinations as to
[49:14] the safety or future of that
[49:14] child is that all correct
[49:16] correct the monitor if it was a
[49:18] family member, hopefully they
[49:20] would be sharing what they're
[49:22] seeing with the worker and then
[49:22] the worker could take that in
[49:24] combination with provider
[49:25] reports and things like that to
[49:26] then put in the report for the
[49:26] court
[49:32] do you see any failings within
[49:33] the system that you would
[49:36] recommend within your you know
[49:38] purview as the deputy director
[49:39] over oversight of this again
[49:41] with the policy goal of ensuring
[49:42] that we have protection of
[49:44] children that could be in
[49:44] precarious situations
[49:48] think that's a difficult
[49:50] question. I think we're
[49:52] always looking to improve our
[49:54] practice as a state and as an
[49:55] agency
[49:58] you know case by case everything
[50:00] looks a little bit different but
[50:02] to say today I know of children
[50:02] or families that have been
[50:04] impacted by this that's a
[50:06] hard question to ask but
[50:07] something we're continuously
[50:10] self-ref reflecting on to
[50:12] improve practice for the
[50:12] children and for their
[50:13] safety.
[50:19] how is so you said 1f kids is
[50:21] the you know assigned workload
[50:22] or try to be a are we able to
[50:26] continue on with the
[50:28] employment's needs to meet that
[50:29] does it get overloaded
[50:30] sometimes? What does that look
[50:32] like as far as budgetary as well
[50:34] as actual staffing it definitely
[50:36] fluctuates region by region
[50:38] we have ive regions so if you
[50:40] have a more stable workforce you
[50:42] do see us meeting that workload
[50:45] standard more easily I'd
[50:48] have to get I mean we we could
[50:48] get you some numbers on where
[50:50] we're at with workload standards
[50:51] for the state if that's
[50:51] required
[50:54] further questions in committee
[51:00] say no Senator Hicks thank you
[51:01] deputy director you so much
[51:14] thank you thank you so much
[51:16] megan for for being with us
[51:18] today. we are now going to
[51:18] hear from the office of the
[51:22] attorney general we have Miguel
[51:24] Mojica a victim advocate and I
[51:26] don't know if they're going to
[51:28] present together or separate but
[51:30] we also have myel solarzano
[51:32] who is a program certification
[51:34] manner manager with the attorney
[51:36] general's office. thank you so
[51:36] much for joining us today.
[51:49] there we go thank you all
[51:50] first off I want to thank you
[51:52] Senator Hicks and members of the
[51:54] committee for this opportunity
[51:54] for our office to
[51:56] talk a little bit about
[51:58] certification what that looks
[52:00] like it's just some safety and
[52:02] accountability measures we have
[52:03] currently for the types of
[52:06] programs that we certify my name
[52:06] is Miguel Mojica I'm the
[52:08] certification manager for
[52:10] batters intervention programs
[52:13] today I'm joined with a myel
[52:14] soarno I'm the program
[52:15] certification manager withinassu
[52:17] so between the two of us we
[52:20] handle certification across
[52:22] those two pro batters
[52:23] intervention domestic violence
[52:24] sexual assault programs and then
[52:26] human trafficking programs so
[52:28] between the three types of
[52:30] certifications we have over70
[52:32] types over 70 programs in the
[52:36] state so very well familiar
[52:38] with certification starting
[52:39] new programs and then you'll
[52:40] hear a little bit about
[52:42] existing measures to keep
[52:43] programs certified as well.
[52:49] so today before we kind of dive
[52:50] into our slides just giving a
[52:52] little roadmap of what today's
[52:54] going to look like and what
[52:54] we're gonna talk about we're
[52:56] gonna go over a little bit of
[53:00] existing framework that is
[53:02] within our office that holds
[53:04] or that presents standards for
[53:06] us to certify programs we'll
[53:08] also talk about the existing
[53:10] standards in place for those
[53:12] programs to offer services
[53:14] we're gonna talk about what the
[53:15] actual process looks like to
[53:15] become certified in
[53:18] a very brief manner. we could
[53:20] talk about this for an hour
[53:22] easily but for the sake of
[53:24] time we'll give you just a very
[53:24] quick general overview of that
[53:28] process we'll also get to talk
[53:30] about some of what we consider
[53:32] our most important standards
[53:34] in place that whole document is
[53:35] important but today I think for
[53:37] the purpose of today's
[53:38] conversation we really want to
[53:40] look at what it takes to measure
[53:42] safety whether that's supervised
[53:45] visitation or our certified DBSA
[53:45] programs so
[53:48] talk through some of those
[53:50] standards and then just the
[53:51] overall importance of what
[53:52] certification looks like so
[53:56] starting out with the framework
[53:58] of our office our work is
[54:00] governed specifically by the
[54:04] administrative code OACitle75
[54:06] chapter one and chapter fif
[54:08] specifically for DBSA programs
[54:10] there's other corresponding
[54:12] chapters of course for
[54:12] depending on the certification
[54:14] type but today we'll talk about
[54:16] DBSA programs specifically
[54:18] and again domestic violence
[54:20] sexual assault we have many many
[54:22] acron acronyms in the world of
[54:23] victim services so
[54:24] starting with chapter one
[54:26] this really outlines
[54:30] key terms you'll different
[54:32] certification types the
[54:34] timelines what it takes to
[54:36] actually file an application
[54:38] through our office and it
[54:40] also clarifies that
[54:42] certification is a license so
[54:45] very rigid requirements for
[54:46] anyone interested in applying
[54:48] for certification so you will
[54:50] hear about what it takes to
[54:50] become certified but just know
[54:54] that it's licensed and
[54:54] just like any other license
[54:56] that's issued by the state
[54:57] there are rigid
[54:57] requirements
[55:00] specifically for chapter 1f
[55:04] you'll see scattered out through
[55:06] this section different
[55:08] program requirements that can
[55:10] be anything from the facility
[55:12] itself where they'll be
[55:14] providing services documentation
[55:16] standards how they're actually
[55:18] documenting the services that
[55:20] are being provided by that
[55:22] program training all of these
[55:23] are defined within their own
[55:24] subchapters I mean this is
[55:26] probably a20 to30 ppage document
[55:30] that outlines all the
[55:30] expectations that our office has
[55:31] for these
[55:34] programs assessment
[55:36] background confidentiality just
[55:38] the main gist is that it's a
[55:41] very concise document that
[55:42] outlines the expectations of
[55:43] those programs
[55:48] this is the certification
[55:50] process mapped out and as I said
[55:52] a very general version of that
[55:54] I could probably add another
[55:56] 10 boxes here but it starts out
[56:00] with an application so from
[56:02] the very beginning when we're
[56:02] having a conversation with
[56:04] someone who wants to provide
[56:07] DBSA services whether that be
[56:08] crisis intervention or shelter
[56:12] services we need to get a get an
[56:14] idea of who's talking to us who
[56:15] is
[56:16] who's this program that wants to
[56:18] provide these services so this
[56:20] application's going to ask for
[56:22] all sorts of organizational
[56:24] information we're gonna want to
[56:26] see their if they're a
[56:26] business registration as a
[56:28] business entity or documents of
[56:31] incorporation that determines
[56:32] there are nonprofit very just
[56:34] procedural organizational
[56:36] information so there's lots
[56:38] of back and forth at the
[56:40] beginning we have conversations
[56:42] with them either in person or
[56:44] virtually to map out those
[56:45] expectations in that
[56:46] way they understand what they're
[56:50] sending in from that point we
[56:52] would review this application,
[56:54] make sure it is deemed to be
[56:55] complete that they've provided
[56:57] everything upfront just that
[56:58] original or that first off
[57:00] the policies and procedures that
[57:02] they have an idea of these are
[57:03] the services we're gonna to
[57:03] provide
[57:06] after that we move into
[57:10] review so we would schedule a
[57:12] review to be conducted in person
[57:14] at this facility that's when we
[57:16] actually get to review policies
[57:18] procedures start to finish we
[57:20] see who's going to be providing
[57:22] the services we talked to the
[57:24] staff members we get an idea of
[57:25] their board
[57:28] training just all the upfront
[57:30] necessities that they would need
[57:31] to have in place in order to
[57:32] operate a successful program
[57:33] so we would review
[57:36] all those things from that point
[57:38] that goes into the on site
[57:40] review which I mentioned a
[57:42] little bit to take it a step
[57:44] further we want to see what
[57:44] implementation is going to look
[57:47] like for us to go to a crisis
[57:48] center we're going to want to
[57:52] see that they have a24 hour line
[57:53] available we want to make sure
[57:54] that they have clothing on site
[57:56] all the necessities that these
[57:59] the victims are going to need at
[58:01] the time of services that's when
[58:02] safety measures also come up as
[58:03] well we're going to look at the
[58:04] location
[58:06] of this facility we want to make
[58:08] sure that these services are
[58:10] confidential at any point for
[58:12] the victims so it's a very
[58:14] important part for us to really
[58:16] get a clear idea of what's
[58:17] happening here with this program
[58:21] from there once we've had the
[58:24] opportunity to review their
[58:28] policies look at their physical
[58:30] location that's when we get to
[58:32] make a compliance determination
[58:34] so without getting into all the
[58:36] different numbers of percentages
[58:36] that they have to meet in a
[58:39] nutshell they have to meet a
[58:41] specific percentage that allows
[58:43] them to gain that certification
[58:46] status so with that they
[58:48] would be given that temporary or
[58:49] condition
[58:52] al status to provide services
[58:54] that's not the end of this
[58:55] process that's actually what I
[58:56] would consider the first most
[58:58] important beginning of it
[58:59] because that's when natural
[59:00] services start and where all
[59:02] those safety measures have to be
[59:04] taken they have to take place
[59:07] and so we would have that
[59:08] conversation with them make
[59:10] sure that they're setting
[59:12] themselves up for success we
[59:14] have a very strict 100%
[59:16] compliance requirement at the
[59:18] end of this process so starting
[59:19] out
[59:20] of course there's going to be
[59:22] room for maybe there's a
[59:24] training missed or you know some
[59:26] documents that need to be
[59:28] corrected so there there's
[59:28] there's room for those
[59:30] conversations and what we would
[59:32] call deficiencies you know we
[59:34] send out reports but by the
[59:36] end of it we want to make sure
[59:38] that this program is completely
[59:42] 100% compliant that way we have
[59:44] the confidence to give our
[59:46] offices stamp of approval and
[59:46] full certification that this
[59:48] program is following all those
[59:50] standards that I mentioned in
[59:51] chapter fif.
[59:54] so from there that would lead
[59:56] into the oversight role where
[59:58] there's continued compliance
[1:00:00] it's this this process really
[1:00:02] doesn't ever I'll say it has a
[1:00:04] finish point for the sake of our
[1:00:05] programs that want to get to the
[1:00:06] end to the finish line if we
[1:00:08] told them there wasn't a finish
[1:00:08] line I don't think we'd get very
[1:00:11] many people to apply but
[1:00:14] compliance is ongoing there's
[1:00:16] conversations whether those are
[1:00:17] meetings that our office
[1:00:19] hosts conversations with
[1:00:20] executive directors it's
[1:00:23] ongoing so we just want to make
[1:00:25] sure that our programs are
[1:00:27] taking these standards seriously
[1:00:29] and that safety is always
[1:00:30] considered we'll kind of move
[1:00:32] into what some of those
[1:00:34] standards look like and what
[1:00:35] they can actually address
[1:00:40] so now that we have talked a bit
[1:00:42] about the regulatory framework
[1:00:42] surrounding the certification
[1:00:44] process. I think it's important
[1:00:46] for us to discuss why that
[1:00:46] framework matters
[1:00:48] specifically when it comes to
[1:00:50] safety and accountability
[1:00:52] particularly when working
[1:00:54] with vulnerable populations and
[1:00:54] what certification allows us to
[1:00:56] do is take something that is as
[1:00:58] important and but sometimes
[1:01:00] broad as safety and turn it
[1:01:02] into specific expectations and
[1:01:04] so echoing what Miguel had
[1:01:06] said earlier and we are able to
[1:01:07] do that with the language we
[1:01:07] have set in
[1:01:08] the standards and criteria for
[1:01:10] all of our certified providers
[1:01:12] and so we've highlighted a
[1:01:14] few different key areas for sake
[1:01:16] of brevity in this presentation
[1:01:17] we haven't cited the specific
[1:01:19] standards that we have set but
[1:01:20] you know different key areas
[1:01:22] would include physical safety of
[1:01:24] the location where services are
[1:01:27] being provided to survivors
[1:01:28] reaching out to receive those
[1:01:30] services and we're looking at
[1:01:31] different things you know
[1:01:32] facility requirements the the
[1:01:34] standards are pretty
[1:01:34] straightforward about what's
[1:01:36] required there and some of
[1:01:37] the language we have said
[1:01:40] is a bit more black and white
[1:01:42] concrete about what our
[1:01:44] expectations are and you know
[1:01:45] when it comes to approved fire
[1:01:46] inspection that's pretty
[1:01:47] straightforward about what we
[1:01:50] are requiring versus emergency
[1:01:52] procedures what an agency has
[1:01:54] set and may look different we
[1:01:56] still require you know they have
[1:01:58] a plan for dealing with bomb
[1:01:59] threats intruder drills,
[1:02:00] different things but
[1:02:02] depending on the agency you know
[1:02:02] they're going to have different
[1:02:04] number of staff, different
[1:02:06] layout of their facilities and
[1:02:07] and so it is going to look
[1:02:07] different depending
[1:02:10] on which agency we're looking at
[1:02:12] another area of policies and
[1:02:14] procedures we have language set
[1:02:14] there and making sure that it's
[1:02:16] consistent so there are
[1:02:18] protocols set up for safety
[1:02:20] concerns and incidents that may
[1:02:24] occur and training as well
[1:02:26] for the staff members who are
[1:02:27] providing direct or nondirect
[1:02:30] care to the clients who are
[1:02:32] reaching out for services and we
[1:02:34] have in our standard drink
[1:02:36] criteria it's set up we have
[1:02:37] specific training topic require
[1:02:40] ment s that each agency has to
[1:02:42] go over but again this is
[1:02:44] gonna look different depending
[1:02:45] on the organization so agency A
[1:02:46] may have an in-house training
[1:02:48] that they've developed that
[1:02:48] meets that criteria versus
[1:02:52] agency B may elect to utilize a
[1:02:52] state or federal training that
[1:02:54] they think works well for their
[1:02:57] staff and different ways that
[1:02:58] we're able to monitor compliance
[1:03:00] with those standards and you
[1:03:01] know as we're going out and
[1:03:02] conducting these on site reviews
[1:03:04] it's looking through the
[1:03:06] personnel files log trainings
[1:03:07] or training logs I apolog
[1:03:10] ize having conversation with
[1:03:14] the staff and executive director
[1:03:15] it really looks different but
[1:03:16] we have different mechanisms in
[1:03:18] place for being able to monitor
[1:03:20] compliance with that language
[1:03:22] again I think oversight really
[1:03:24] the biggest piece fortgen
[1:03:26] criteria we are able to go in
[1:03:28] and have a mechanism set in
[1:03:30] place for being able to
[1:03:32] ensure that
[1:03:34] the agency is operating in a way
[1:03:36] that is in alignment with the
[1:03:37] expectations set forward
[1:03:38] by our office
[1:03:43] and so then we jump over into
[1:03:44] certification as a safety and
[1:03:46] accountability framework and
[1:03:48] I believe that Oklahoma's
[1:03:50] existing certification model and
[1:03:52] we do provide a framework to hit
[1:03:54] a variety of different
[1:03:54] important factors but we wanted
[1:03:56] to highlight these five and
[1:03:58] consistency, safety, quality,
[1:04:00] accountability and continuous
[1:04:02] improvement so with
[1:04:04] consistency again just a common
[1:04:06] baseline of expectations that we
[1:04:08] have for the agencies it is
[1:04:09] going to look different in
[1:04:09] practice but
[1:04:12] we have maintained a close level
[1:04:14] of communication with all of our
[1:04:15] certified providers to ensure
[1:04:17] that once they are certified and
[1:04:18] have that stamp of approval from
[1:04:22] our office. we know that the
[1:04:22] services being provided are
[1:04:24] consistent and in alignment with
[1:04:26] the expectations set forward
[1:04:28] before them and same with safety
[1:04:30] and the standards are are very
[1:04:33] clear as to what we require
[1:04:35] there quality of services and if
[1:04:38] you go to the southwest portion
[1:04:38] of the state and seek out
[1:04:39] services through one of our
[1:04:39] certified providers
[1:04:42] there and we can ensure that the
[1:04:44] quality of services is going to
[1:04:45] be the same as if you were to go
[1:04:46] to the northwestern part of the
[1:04:48] state and seek out services
[1:04:50] through a provider there same
[1:04:52] with accountability against
[1:04:54] standards and criteria really
[1:04:56] has developed a mechanism for us
[1:04:58] to be able to evaluate and
[1:05:00] monitor compliance as that's
[1:05:02] ongoing and continuous
[1:05:04] improvement umiguiel and I have
[1:05:06] a great working relationship I
[1:05:08] would say with all 30 of our
[1:05:09] certified DVSA providers
[1:05:09] throughout the
[1:05:13] state and we are easy to get in
[1:05:13] contact with
[1:05:16] and we are consistently
[1:05:18] providing any technical
[1:05:20] assistance and corrective action
[1:05:24] when needed and so we are
[1:05:25] continuously having follow up
[1:05:26] with all of the providers who
[1:05:28] are providing services
[1:05:29] throughout the state of Oklahoma
[1:05:36] and so again I know Miguel had
[1:05:38] echoed it earlier for sake of
[1:05:40] time we condensed all of this
[1:05:42] information down but we are
[1:05:43] more than happy to answer any
[1:05:45] questions or we've provided our
[1:05:47] contact information so if at any
[1:05:48] point you have any questions or
[1:05:50] concerns we would love to get in
[1:05:51] contact with you and help answer
[1:05:51] those. so thank you
[1:05:52] for your time.
[1:05:54] en ator Hicks
[1:05:56] members of the committee
[1:06:00] questions
[1:06:05] appreciate you guys
[1:06:08] participating for the attorney
[1:06:08] general's office and review of
[1:06:10] what the certifications are for
[1:06:12] these that are actually out in
[1:06:13] the communities
[1:06:16] Senator Hicks you recognized for
[1:06:17] introduction of your next
[1:06:17] speaker.
[1:06:20] thank you again so much for
[1:06:22] providing that insight because
[1:06:24] now we're actually going to hear
[1:06:26] from one of the DVSA providers
[1:06:30] so the YWCA is joining us
[1:06:32] today. this is uhimmoha Mosher
[1:06:33] the senior director of domestic
[1:06:35] violenceolenceervices and
[1:06:37] Anitayidberg the senior director
[1:06:38] of residential services
[1:06:39] welcomelcome.
[1:06:39] good afternoon
[1:06:44] thank you senator Hicks members
[1:06:45] of the committee we appreciate
[1:06:47] the opportunity to share the
[1:06:48] perspective of a domestic
[1:06:50] violence victim service
[1:06:52] provider. Our main point today
[1:06:54] is simple supervised visitation
[1:06:56] is not automatically safe
[1:06:57] visitation.
[1:07:00] in domestic violence cases
[1:07:02] safety depends on whether the
[1:07:03] process recognizes coercive
[1:07:06] control, addresses risk before
[1:07:08] during and after contact and has
[1:07:09] meaningful structure and
[1:07:09] accountability
[1:07:14] to explain what we mean it is
[1:07:16] important to distinguish high
[1:07:18] conflict co parenting from
[1:07:20] coercive controlling violence
[1:07:22] when practical challenge is that
[1:07:23] highrisk domestic violence can
[1:07:25] be framed as high conflict co
[1:07:27] parenting those are not
[1:07:27] necessarily the same dynamic
[1:07:30] High conflict may involve
[1:07:32] disagreement, poor communication
[1:07:34] or hostility often centered on
[1:07:37] difficulty managing a co
[1:07:37] parenting relationship.
[1:07:40] but coercive controlling
[1:07:42] violence sometimes described in
[1:07:44] the research as intimate partner
[1:07:46] terrorism is a pattern of
[1:07:48] domestic violence in which one
[1:07:50] partner uses abuse threats
[1:07:52] stalking, intimidation and
[1:07:54] children or other systems to
[1:07:56] dominate the other parent and
[1:07:57] maintain power and control.
[1:08:02] for example an abuser may use
[1:08:04] information obtained through the
[1:08:06] children repeated court filings
[1:08:08] or required parent communication
[1:08:11] to maintain access to and
[1:08:12] control over the victim. When
[1:08:14] that is the underlying dynamic
[1:08:16] practices designed simply to
[1:08:17] improve
[1:08:20] communication or encourage co
[1:08:22] parenting can create additional
[1:08:22] risk to the adult victim and the
[1:08:23] children.
[1:08:28] and in fact separation
[1:08:31] from a domestic violence
[1:08:34] relationship does not end
[1:08:34] domestic violence in the
[1:08:36] coercive control. In fact
[1:08:38] research tells us that
[1:08:40] separation is the most dangerous
[1:08:42] time for a victim. There are
[1:08:44] some studies that find that the
[1:08:46] increased risk is up to two
[1:08:47] years post separation.
[1:08:50] some of the tactics of post
[1:08:52] separation abuse can include
[1:08:54] psychological legal, economic
[1:08:58] systems based abuse including
[1:08:59] the weaponization of children
[1:09:02] so custody, visitation and
[1:09:05] exchanges can create predictable
[1:09:06] points of continued access and
[1:09:07] risk.
[1:09:10] this context is really important
[1:09:13] to consider sometimes victims
[1:09:16] behavior that is actually rooted
[1:09:18] in safety can be misread as
[1:09:20] hostility or an unwillingness to
[1:09:21] co parent.
[1:09:26] such as of waiting direct
[1:09:27] contact protecting their
[1:09:28] address, requesting separate
[1:09:32] arrivals strictly following a
[1:09:34] court order they actually may be
[1:09:36] strategies for victims to reduce
[1:09:37] access and stay safe.
[1:09:41] I remember working with a victim
[1:09:43] where we safety planned around
[1:09:45] exchange of children. We talked
[1:09:47] about not passing the child's
[1:09:49] belongings back and forth
[1:09:50] because even something as simple
[1:09:54] as a jacket or a lunchbox could
[1:09:54] become another reason for
[1:09:55] contact.
[1:09:58] What looked like a disagreement
[1:10:00] over belongings was for her
[1:10:01] another avenue of access and
[1:10:01] control.
[1:10:05] and in domestic violence cases
[1:10:05] the safety
[1:10:08] of children is directly
[1:10:10] correlated to the safety of the
[1:10:11] adult victim.
[1:10:14] So visitation cannot be
[1:10:16] evaluated only by whether a
[1:10:18] child appears physically safe
[1:10:20] during a visit. We also have to
[1:10:22] be asking whether the
[1:10:24] arrangement creates additional
[1:10:26] risk or continued control over
[1:10:27] the non abusive parent.
[1:10:30] We recently conducted a
[1:10:32] listening session in our
[1:10:33] domestic violence shelter
[1:10:36] one survivor said dropping your
[1:10:38] kids off to someone that hurts
[1:10:38] you is scary.
[1:10:42] for a survivor an exchange is
[1:10:44] not necessarily a routine
[1:10:45] parenting handoff
[1:10:48] but it is also can be a required
[1:10:50] point of access to the person
[1:10:51] who hurt them
[1:10:54] and that is why safety has to be
[1:10:56] built into the structure not
[1:10:58] assumed because contact is court
[1:10:59] ordered
[1:11:00] and that's gonna bring us to the
[1:11:01] next question
[1:11:04] what exactly do we mean by
[1:11:05] supervised and who is doing the
[1:11:05] supervision?
[1:11:14] I don't know if you're able to
[1:11:15] advance the line
[1:11:30] just to preserve time I will
[1:11:31] just keep talking and then
[1:11:32] hopefully the slides will catch
[1:11:33] up to us
[1:11:36] but supervised can mean
[1:11:38] different things. It can mean
[1:11:40] informal supervision that might
[1:11:41] look like a family member or a
[1:11:42] friend who has very little
[1:11:43] domestic violenceific training
[1:11:48] limited structure and also
[1:11:49] includes the potential for
[1:11:50] family bias or pressure.
[1:11:54] and our listening session that
[1:11:55] we conducted recently, one woman
[1:11:56] described having to turn her
[1:11:58] children over to the abuses of
[1:12:00] partners parents for visits and
[1:12:03] she said it made me physically
[1:12:03] ill every time
[1:12:08] that is an important reminder
[1:12:09] that simply having another adult
[1:12:11] present does not necessarily
[1:12:11] create safety
[1:12:16] who is supervising matters and
[1:12:18] it matters whether that person
[1:12:19] understands coercive control
[1:12:22] stalking, confidentiality and
[1:12:23] safe exchange practices
[1:12:26] and even when supervision is
[1:12:28] appropriate staff can only
[1:12:29] observe what happens within the
[1:12:30] visit itself. Risk might still
[1:12:34] happen before after or during
[1:12:34] that contact.
[1:12:40] Risk does not necessarily begin
[1:12:41] and end during the supervised
[1:12:43] visit as Anita just stated it
[1:12:44] can arise during the exchange,
[1:12:46] the transportation the
[1:12:48] communication before or after
[1:12:50] the visit or through information
[1:12:50] and access gained during the
[1:12:51] visit.
[1:12:54] These risks do not always look
[1:12:56] dramatic. In fact coercion is
[1:12:58] often subtle. for example, a
[1:12:59] person may wait near the
[1:13:00] visitation site to identify the
[1:13:02] victim's vehicle or learn a
[1:13:03] routine
[1:13:06] Technology can also be used to
[1:13:06] track or stalk the victim
[1:13:08] through a GPS tracker in a
[1:13:10] diaper bag. the location
[1:13:12] services on a child's smartwat
[1:13:14] or access to shared accounts.
[1:13:16] Children may be used to gather
[1:13:18] information or carry messages a
[1:13:19] child may be asked where the
[1:13:21] survivor lives, works or spends
[1:13:24] time and a phrase a gift or a
[1:13:25] gesture that appears harmless to
[1:13:27] the supervisor could actually
[1:13:28] have a threatening meaning based
[1:13:30] on the history of abuse like a
[1:13:31] toy weapon
[1:13:34] an incidentfree visit can tell
[1:13:35] us that someone was able to
[1:13:37] follow the rules within a highly
[1:13:40] structured setting. It cannot by
[1:13:40] itself tell us whether the
[1:13:42] underlying pattern of coercion
[1:13:44] stalking intimidation or abuse
[1:13:46] has changed outside that
[1:13:48] setting. These examples are why
[1:13:50] supervised visitation cannot be
[1:13:52] treated as a one time placement
[1:13:52] decision. it requires
[1:13:54] intentional safeguards and
[1:13:55] ongoing attention to changing
[1:13:56] risk.
[1:13:58] if we're going to use supervised
[1:14:00] visitation in domestic violence
[1:14:02] cases the system requires
[1:14:04] intentional and ongoing
[1:14:06] safeguards. First screening must
[1:14:08] go beyond whether there has been
[1:14:09] a reported incident of physical
[1:14:11] violence. it should assess
[1:14:13] coercive control stalking,
[1:14:15] lethality concerns post
[1:14:17] separation abuse technology
[1:14:18] facilitated abuse and the use of
[1:14:19] the children.
[1:14:22] Second risk must be reassessed
[1:14:24] over time. An intake assessment
[1:14:26] is only a snapshotreats stalking
[1:14:28] behavior and access to
[1:14:30] information can change.
[1:14:32] Reassessment should not mean
[1:14:34] that the supervision ends simply
[1:14:34] because time has passed without
[1:14:38] a documented incident. Finally
[1:14:39] programs need trained staff,
[1:14:41] careful documentation and formal
[1:14:42] partnerships with domestic
[1:14:44] violence victim service
[1:14:46] providers so that safety
[1:14:46] concerns are recognized and
[1:14:47] acted upon.
[1:14:50] especially where there has been
[1:14:52] significant violence stalking,
[1:14:54] coercive control or ongoing
[1:14:55] intimidation and fear, the
[1:14:56] question should be whether the
[1:14:58] abuser has demonstrated
[1:15:00] meaningful behavior change and
[1:15:02] taken responsibility not simply
[1:15:03] whether they were able to
[1:15:05] contain inappropriate behavior
[1:15:06] while being supervised and
[1:15:07] monitored
[1:15:09] Decisions about reducing
[1:15:11] supervision should be based on a
[1:15:14] clear individualized indicator
[1:15:15] as safety and change rather than
[1:15:18] a series of uneventful events
[1:15:19] these measures help ensure that
[1:15:21] safety concerns are recognized
[1:15:22] and addressed not minimized as
[1:15:24] ordinary co parenting conflict
[1:15:27] but safeguards and assessments
[1:15:30] only matter if concerns lead to
[1:15:31] a meaningful response that
[1:15:33] brings us to what survivors
[1:15:35] rather identified most clearly
[1:15:36] and that is accountability.
[1:15:41] it is really important that we
[1:15:43] center survivor voices at this
[1:15:43] discussion
[1:15:48] Throughout my time working with
[1:15:50] victims over the last couple of
[1:15:51] decades and based on a recent
[1:15:53] listening session specific to
[1:15:53] this topic
[1:15:59] we ask and we assess what is
[1:16:02] going to make visitation feel
[1:16:03] safer for your survivors of
[1:16:04] domestic violence and the
[1:16:06] clearest theme is
[1:16:06] accountability.
[1:16:08] and when they talk about
[1:16:09] accountability
[1:16:12] they mean what happens if
[1:16:14] someone uses the child to gather
[1:16:16] information. what happens is
[1:16:18] staff observe intimidation or
[1:16:19] concerning changes in behavior
[1:16:22] what happens when the survivor
[1:16:24] reports news stocking or threads
[1:16:26] c co un t ability means
[1:16:28] addressing those concerns with a
[1:16:30] meaningful response, not simply
[1:16:32] that the next visit will proceed
[1:16:33] unchanged
[1:16:36] and that is why success should
[1:16:38] not be measured likeammmy said
[1:16:40] by only when whether a visit
[1:16:43] occurs it should be measured by
[1:16:44] whether the structure reduces
[1:16:47] physical and emotional risk for
[1:16:48] both the nonoffending parent and
[1:16:49] the child.
[1:16:52] and from the domestic violence
[1:16:54] field we would we would urge
[1:16:54] this following four things
[1:16:56] the importance of
[1:16:58] differentiating coercive control
[1:16:59] from high conflict parenting
[1:17:02] the use of domestic violence
[1:17:06] informed screening and ongoing
[1:17:06] risk assessment
[1:17:09] building specialized domestic
[1:17:10] violence expertise and
[1:17:12] partnerships with victim service
[1:17:14] providers and measuring the
[1:17:16] safety and success by whether
[1:17:16] the structure reduces that
[1:17:18] physical and emotional safety
[1:17:20] risk for the survivor and their
[1:17:22] child not simply whether a visit
[1:17:23] occurred.
[1:17:26] so the question is not only
[1:17:26] whether contact can be
[1:17:28] supervised is whether contact
[1:17:30] can be structured without
[1:17:31] becoming another avenue for
[1:17:31] abuse.
[1:17:36] What questions might there be
[1:17:42] thank you so much
[1:17:46] I was writing everything down as
[1:17:47] fast as they could
[1:17:50] if you could go back to the who
[1:17:51] is supervising slide
[1:17:59] I think this really highlights
[1:18:02] why we're gathered here today
[1:18:05] and and as we were building
[1:18:07] out our agenda and I'm grateful
[1:18:10] that you all agreed to come
[1:18:11] and present from the research
[1:18:14] that you all collect what is the
[1:18:16] most meaningful change I mean I
[1:18:19] I wrote down your last four
[1:18:22] recommendations from the ladies
[1:18:23] and so I'm just wondering if you
[1:18:26] were to recommend a policy
[1:18:26] change specifically
[1:18:28] around this what would that look
[1:18:29] like?
[1:18:35] I think the policy changes that
[1:18:36] we would really consider and
[1:18:38] recommend are really rooted in
[1:18:39] these four areas
[1:18:44] en er hicks revolt
[1:18:48] thank you Mr Chair and so then I
[1:18:50] mean on the question of
[1:18:51] accountability
[1:18:56] when the women were expressing
[1:18:57] that there should be
[1:18:59] accountability if there are
[1:19:02] violations you know that
[1:19:04] would escalate behavior or
[1:19:06] intimidation or continued
[1:19:08] harassment. what does that
[1:19:10] accountability look like and
[1:19:10] from whom
[1:19:12] I think
[1:19:18] sometimes taking a break from
[1:19:20] having access to the abusive
[1:19:23] parent might be the most helpful
[1:19:23] thing to the child.
[1:19:24] and that is not
[1:19:26] said lightly
[1:19:28] but
[1:19:33] if the potential for safety
[1:19:36] to be compromised is directly
[1:19:38] tied to the abuser having access
[1:19:40] to the children I think there
[1:19:42] are times when it is appropriate
[1:19:44] to suspend visitation and not
[1:19:45] just rely on supervision.
[1:19:49] senator hicks for another
[1:19:54] other members of the committee
[1:20:00] so in the situation that you're
[1:20:01] saying you know
[1:20:04] limitation and or cessation of
[1:20:07] visitation how how would you go
[1:20:08] about bringing that evidence and
[1:20:10] who would be responsible in the
[1:20:11] cases that you're proposing this
[1:20:11] in
[1:20:14] because I'm sure you know are
[1:20:16] these DHS cases where we're
[1:20:18] talking state custody or these
[1:20:20] general divorce family law cases
[1:20:20] that you're
[1:20:22] recommending this policy change
[1:20:23] for
[1:20:26] I think just general cases is
[1:20:27] kind of what I had in mind. I
[1:20:29] don't know about you Anita and I
[1:20:30] think we're looking for
[1:20:32] meaningful change we're looking
[1:20:34] for an abuser taking
[1:20:36] accountability for their actions
[1:20:38] and recognizing that what they
[1:20:39] have done has caused harm to
[1:20:41] their family and taking specific
[1:20:42] steps to stop causing that harm
[1:20:46] and I think the accountability
[1:20:48] can extend to both DhS and
[1:20:52] family courts and I also
[1:20:54] think that accountability looks
[1:20:54] like
[1:20:58] victims not being punished by
[1:21:01] systems who are choosing tour
[1:21:06] utilize protective capacity to
[1:21:07] keep themselves and their child
[1:21:10] safe but maybe through the lens
[1:21:10] of a court order it looks like
[1:21:12] they are being uncooperative or
[1:21:16] not abiding by a court order and
[1:21:18] then they they face a lot of
[1:21:20] consequences negative
[1:21:20] consequences from systems
[1:21:24] or the domestic violence is not
[1:21:24] acknowledged and it just is
[1:21:25] labeled as a high conflict case.
[1:21:30] so in those situations what is
[1:21:32] your recommendation under the
[1:21:34] current system for how this
[1:21:36] would be brought forward and
[1:21:38] just a court filing of a motion
[1:21:40] in the civil case is a
[1:21:42] recommendation of filing police
[1:21:44] reports because of abuse how
[1:21:44] would those be investigated?
[1:21:46] what would be the next steps
[1:21:47] within
[1:21:49] I think we'd like to work with
[1:21:49] Judge Byer
[1:21:52] and judgedge conyers on on some
[1:21:53] of those recommendations
[1:21:58] and then going back I guess to
[1:22:00] what Senator Hicks had brought
[1:22:02] up about who would be supervised
[1:22:04] in there you know who qualifies
[1:22:05] as supervised
[1:22:06] for those visitations
[1:22:12] do you see that there is a need
[1:22:14] for no family involvement that
[1:22:16] that can't be an option. how
[1:22:18] would other people get
[1:22:20] interested into this or we get
[1:22:22] them in especially you know
[1:22:23] within budget constraints that
[1:22:24] we have
[1:22:26] think this is where the victim
[1:22:29] voice comes into play and asking
[1:22:32] the the non abusing parent who
[1:22:33] is safe who is a safe supervisor
[1:22:40] I think family can be safe
[1:22:41] supervisors but I think the
[1:22:42] importance of assessing that
[1:22:44] very thoroughly and working
[1:22:46] collaboratively with other
[1:22:48] systems who have intersected
[1:22:50] with the family can really be
[1:22:54] eye opening and telling to some
[1:22:55] of the potential risks and
[1:22:55] benefits that might go along
[1:22:56] with that
[1:23:00] any further questions
[1:23:03] comments Senator Hicks
[1:23:07] thank you Mr Chair thank you all
[1:23:10] so much for joining us. I
[1:23:11] know this is not a light topic
[1:23:13] for a Monday afternoon so
[1:23:14] again I appreciate you all
[1:23:17] sharing your expertise. next
[1:23:19] we're joined by Gwendolyn
[1:23:20] Clegg
[1:23:22] with the office of Family
[1:23:23] Representation
[1:23:38] there you go
[1:23:43] thank you senator Hicks and
[1:23:45] members of the committee
[1:23:47] thank you for inviting me today
[1:23:49] to explain what the Oklahoma
[1:23:50] office the family representation
[1:23:52] is what we do what we were
[1:23:54] entrusted with in our mission
[1:23:56] from the legislature. The
[1:23:57] Oklahoma Office of Family
[1:24:00] Representation came into being
[1:24:02] in June of2023 when our bill
[1:24:04] made it through the
[1:24:06] legislature and we were
[1:24:09] established under Titleen
[1:24:10] Section 801 and
[1:24:13] it is the family representation
[1:24:16] advocacy actct and programme so
[1:24:18] the acronym FAP is kind of
[1:24:20] thrown around a lot and it's not
[1:24:22] an easy acronym to say correctly
[1:24:26] so we have we are a
[1:24:30] program of the administration
[1:24:32] office of the courts and the
[1:24:33] administration office of the
[1:24:35] courts contracted with legal aid
[1:24:36] Services of Oklahoma to build
[1:24:38] the statewide office of parent
[1:24:42] and childpresentation and AOC
[1:24:44] asked that we brand the
[1:24:46] office with a name and with a
[1:24:48] logo and so you'll see that in a
[1:24:50] in a minute but we are the
[1:24:52] Oklahoma office the familymire
[1:24:52] representation and we are
[1:24:56] regularly referred to as OFR and
[1:24:57] I am the executive
[1:25:00] director of the Oklahoma Office
[1:25:01] of Family Representation and a
[1:25:04] little bit about me I have been
[1:25:08] practicing law for26 years um24
[1:25:09] of those years have been in
[1:25:11] juvenile deprived actions. I
[1:25:12] have represented every single
[1:25:16] side of a juvenile deprived case
[1:25:18] except for as an assistant DA so
[1:25:20] I've represented mostly parents
[1:25:22] I've represented children in a
[1:25:24] very rural county in northeast
[1:25:26] Oklahoma. I have represented
[1:25:27] foster parents grandparents
[1:25:30] aunts and uncles in adoptions
[1:25:32] in a guardianships and in
[1:25:34] juvenile deprived proceedings
[1:25:42] So the Oklahoma office of Family
[1:25:44] Representation the purpose
[1:25:46] that the legislature gave us in
[1:25:48] our bill was to ensure uniform
[1:25:50] and high quality legal
[1:25:52] representation for children and
[1:25:54] indigent parents, Indian
[1:25:56] custodians and legal guardians
[1:25:58] in juvenile deprived actions
[1:26:00] only a lot of people like to ask
[1:26:01] to appoint our lawyers to
[1:26:02] adoptions and guardianships and
[1:26:05] we do not work in those areas
[1:26:05] of law
[1:26:12] OFR was needed to overcome
[1:26:14] these barriers that were rampant
[1:26:16] across the state of Oklahoma for
[1:26:18] decades which was
[1:26:20] barriers to ineffective
[1:26:22] representation where a very high
[1:26:24] caseloads for children's lawyers
[1:26:26] and parent lawyers there was a
[1:26:28] lack of centralized oversight no
[1:26:30] one oversaw what these lawyers
[1:26:32] were doing and how their
[1:26:34] representation of these families
[1:26:36] was and there was a lack of
[1:26:38] support services and practice
[1:26:40] resources for the lawyers there
[1:26:44] was a lack of appellate practice
[1:26:44] there was no performance
[1:26:46] oversight there was no complaint
[1:26:48] or complement process for the
[1:26:49] lawyers
[1:26:50] there was inadequate attorney
[1:26:52] compensation. there were no
[1:26:54] practice standards for child
[1:26:56] representation in the state of
[1:26:58] Oklahoma there were parent
[1:27:00] standards of representation but
[1:27:02] not children there was a lack
[1:27:04] of dedicated attorney
[1:27:06] recruitment there were attorney
[1:27:08] desserts in our rural areas and
[1:27:10] there were differences in rural
[1:27:12] and metro practice issues
[1:27:14] childrenldren and parents in the
[1:27:16] state of Oklahoma enjoy an
[1:27:18] Oklahoma constitutional and
[1:27:22] a statutory right to counsel in
[1:27:24] deprived cases in the trial
[1:27:24] court and the appellate courts.
[1:27:30] OFR has solved all these
[1:27:32] barriers in the counties where
[1:27:34] we are implemented the family
[1:27:35] representation and advocacy
[1:27:36] actct and programme statute
[1:27:38] requires written standards of
[1:27:40] practice which the Oklahoma
[1:27:42] Supreme task forcece that
[1:27:46] sunlighted in2024ro we have
[1:27:48] oversight of our contractors
[1:27:50] almost daily we have managing
[1:27:52] attorneys overseeing the
[1:27:54] practice of the lawyers that are
[1:27:55] under them and that we have
[1:27:56] contracted with we have support
[1:27:57] through these manag
[1:28:00] ing attorneys of our contractors
[1:28:02] we have prolific training for
[1:28:04] these contractors these
[1:28:06] contractors are required by law
[1:28:08] to have an annual performance
[1:28:10] review and they are also
[1:28:10] required under two different
[1:28:12] statutes of six hours of
[1:28:14] juvenile deprived relevantcLE
[1:28:15] each year for attorney
[1:28:15] contractors.
[1:28:21] Training is mentioned in the
[1:28:22] family representation and
[1:28:25] advocacy actct ingrame statute4
[1:28:26] times it's mentioned more than
[1:28:28] anything else in that statute.
[1:28:30] So the legislature obviously
[1:28:32] thought that was a big problem
[1:28:34] and wanted to solve it and we
[1:28:36] are here to do that so we ensure
[1:28:37] all of our attorney contractors
[1:28:40] comply with both statutes for
[1:28:42] their CLE we also make sure they
[1:28:42] comply with the Oklahoma
[1:28:43] standards of practicetice for
[1:28:44] attorneys representing parents
[1:28:46] and children those standards are
[1:28:48] on our webpage and you can find
[1:28:48] them there
[1:28:51] OFR provides high quality legal
[1:28:54] training for our contractors
[1:28:56] and when I say contractors
[1:28:57] there's another slide's gonna
[1:28:58] come up and tell you what that
[1:29:00] is but it's attorneys social
[1:29:02] workers' youth and parent
[1:29:04] mentors and so last year for
[1:29:06] state fiscal year25 we provided
[1:29:12] over 188 free CLE hours to our
[1:29:14] attorney contractors as well as
[1:29:16] our social workers and mentorsri
[1:29:18] to OFR the only way attor
[1:29:20] ney practicing juvenile deprived
[1:29:22] law could get continuing legal
[1:29:25] education was to tend the court
[1:29:26] improvement programme
[1:29:28] conference every fall that was
[1:29:30] it 12 hours and all those 12
[1:29:32] hours weren't dedicated to
[1:29:33] attorney training it was
[1:29:34] dedicated to DHS training, Icw
[1:29:38] training, judged training so
[1:29:38] even those lawyers attending
[1:29:40] there wouldn't receive tw2 solid
[1:29:43] hours of attorney training to
[1:29:44] practice in this area of law
[1:29:46] this area of law is very
[1:29:48] nuanced. there's a lot of folks
[1:29:49] that think they can practice
[1:29:49] criminal
[1:29:50] law or family law and just run
[1:29:52] into a courtroom with a file and
[1:29:54] practice this the of law you
[1:29:54] cannot do that effectively
[1:29:59] we also provide 16 hours of
[1:30:00] fundamental training for our
[1:30:02] attorney contractors and they
[1:30:04] must have that done before or
[1:30:06] during the 1st 90 days of taking
[1:30:08] a contract with us. We also
[1:30:10] provide 8+ hours of fundamental
[1:30:10] training for our social workers
[1:30:14] and our mentors and we only
[1:30:16] contract with master's level
[1:30:18] social workers for a reason.
[1:30:20] it's because of their training
[1:30:22] and expertise OFR provides
[1:30:24] additional trainings throughout
[1:30:26] the year on domestic violence
[1:30:27] housing and trauma in
[1:30:28] formed practice. Our trainings
[1:30:30] are on our website and anyone
[1:30:33] can join our trainings and
[1:30:34] some of our trainings are
[1:30:36] recorded and anyone can watch
[1:30:38] them on their own time but we
[1:30:39] can't give youclA credit if you
[1:30:40] just watch them
[1:30:46] OfR contracts like I was saying
[1:30:47] with attorneys master's level
[1:30:48] social workers and mentors to
[1:30:50] provide high effective and high
[1:30:52] quality legal representation
[1:30:54] high quality legal
[1:30:56] representation involves the use
[1:30:58] of interdisciplinary teams and
[1:31:00] interdisciplinary team for a
[1:31:02] parent is an attorney a master's
[1:31:05] level social worker and a parent
[1:31:06] mentor someone who has survived
[1:31:08] this very system and has come
[1:31:10] back around to assist a parent
[1:31:12] getting to go through this
[1:31:13] system for a youth
[1:31:15] it involves the youth attorney,
[1:31:16] a master's level social worker
[1:31:20] and a youth mentor and adult who
[1:31:22] was a child in the foster care
[1:31:24] system to help children
[1:31:26] navigate the system that they
[1:31:26] are in now the foster care
[1:31:30] system OFR is currently
[1:31:32] implemented in51 counties which
[1:31:34] equals66% of the state of
[1:31:36] Oklahomay November 1st we will
[1:31:40] implement se7 more counties and
[1:31:42] that will be leaving only 9
[1:31:43] counties left to implement so
[1:31:44] a high level of
[1:31:48] counties will be implemented by
[1:31:48] the end of this year
[1:31:52] at this time we are contracted
[1:31:54] with 133 trial attorneys,16
[1:31:57] appellate attorneys, se master
[1:31:59] social workers and 18 mentors
[1:32:01] that are comprised of parent and
[1:32:03] youth as you can see that is not
[1:32:04] enough social workers and
[1:32:06] mentors to cover the6000
[1:32:08] children that are in custodydy
[1:32:10] that if you multiplied that by
[1:32:11] two if they each had a parent
[1:32:13] that's not even enough to make a
[1:32:15] dent so we need more of those
[1:32:17] and OFR has eliminated the
[1:32:18] attorney desserts and the
[1:32:18] counties where
[1:32:21] we are implemented in region two
[1:32:24] which is southwest Oklahoma they
[1:32:28] had about 9 counties in2024 when
[1:32:30] we implemented that did not have
[1:32:32] lawyers that would come and
[1:32:32] represent parents or children
[1:32:36] it's much easier for a judge to
[1:32:37] call and ask a lawyer to
[1:32:38] represent a child but that
[1:32:40] representation was not overseen
[1:32:42] and we were unsure what was
[1:32:44] happening. there was a lot of
[1:32:46] children who were being
[1:32:48] represented by the wrong
[1:32:49] standard of care the wrong
[1:32:50] standard and model of
[1:32:52] representation in Oklahoma
[1:32:54] children enjoy the right to
[1:32:56] expressed interest
[1:32:58] representation and our rules of
[1:33:00] professional conduct dictate
[1:33:02] that children as young as ive
[1:33:03] can dictate their represent
[1:33:04] ation in their child custody
[1:33:07] matters if a child cannot
[1:33:09] express their interest of what
[1:33:10] they want their lawyer to do for
[1:33:13] them in their custody proceeding
[1:33:14] then the lawyer must use
[1:33:15] substituted judgment.
[1:33:20] and substituted judgment
[1:33:22] there's criteria in the statute
[1:33:23] for what that is it's not me
[1:33:25] living in midtown Oklahoma
[1:33:28] deciding what a child in North
[1:33:29] Tulsa would want
[1:33:32] so it is considerations for
[1:33:34] the children Oklahoma attorneys
[1:33:36] do not represent children's best
[1:33:38] interests that's what Cosa does
[1:33:38] and that's what guardian ad
[1:33:39] litems for children do.
[1:33:43] interdisciplinary teams and how
[1:33:44] do they work so an
[1:33:46] interdisciplinary team as we
[1:33:47] talked about comprised of an
[1:33:49] attorney a master's level social
[1:33:51] worker and a mentor they work
[1:33:53] together to address the
[1:33:54] conditions that brought the
[1:33:54] children into custody. they're
[1:33:56] not there to minimize the
[1:33:58] conditions they're there to
[1:34:00] understand what they are
[1:34:02] protective capacities into place
[1:34:03] get the assessments done that
[1:34:04] need to be done get the
[1:34:05] referrals done that need to be
[1:34:08] done and help the parent
[1:34:10] understand why their children
[1:34:10] came into custody and why the
[1:34:11] judge
[1:34:12] made this ruling about their
[1:34:14] conditions and help them
[1:34:15] understand the healing that
[1:34:16] needs to happen in their family
[1:34:18] so they can reunify.
[1:34:20] Interdisciplinary teams are
[1:34:22] assigned by OFR at the request
[1:34:24] of an attorney our teams work
[1:34:26] with the clients by identifying
[1:34:27] the client's strengths and needs
[1:34:28] we try to build these parents
[1:34:30] and these children up so that
[1:34:31] they can begin the healing
[1:34:32] process and accept the fact that
[1:34:34] they have to do these services
[1:34:35] in order to reunify with their
[1:34:36] family and they have to learn
[1:34:39] what the services are trying to
[1:34:40] teach them. The team use
[1:34:42] s out of court advocacy to
[1:34:44] gather information, increase
[1:34:46] communication and advocate for
[1:34:47] the client in and out of court
[1:34:49] and the mentors are key to the
[1:34:52] engagement of clients I call the
[1:34:54] mentor's first responders they
[1:34:56] are running back into the
[1:34:56] burning building that they
[1:34:58] escaped to help someone else
[1:35:00] escape and heal from the
[1:35:02] information gathered the
[1:35:04] attorney is equipped to provide
[1:35:05] more information to the court so
[1:35:06] the court can make better
[1:35:07] informed decisions
[1:35:14] these are the counties if
[1:35:16] they're colored where OFR is
[1:35:18] currently implemented by
[1:35:20] November 1st the rest of
[1:35:24] northwest Oklahoma will be
[1:35:24] implemented you will see that's
[1:35:28] judicial district 1,4 and two
[1:35:28] and we will complete judicial
[1:35:32] district22 down in southeast
[1:35:35] Oklahoma leaving only 9 counties
[1:35:36] in southeast Oklahoma and
[1:35:38] Oklahoma County to be
[1:35:40] implemented in the next year
[1:35:41] pending
[1:35:42] appropriations from the
[1:35:43] legislature
[1:35:48] so the impact of OFR
[1:35:54] a judge had stated to us, I can
[1:35:55] tell the cases in my court
[1:35:56] resolved quicker when the parent
[1:35:58] has an OFR interdisciplinary
[1:36:02] team a judge in southeast
[1:36:03] Oklahoma requested that
[1:36:06] OFR be implemented in his
[1:36:08] counties because he thinks I
[1:36:10] would just really benefit from
[1:36:12] OFR a youth mentor that was
[1:36:14] interviewed stated she was so
[1:36:16] thankful that OFR existed and
[1:36:17] the possibilities OFR would give
[1:36:18] youth that were still in the
[1:36:20] system or would be aging out.
[1:36:24] she stated it gives me hope that
[1:36:26] what all I went through in
[1:36:28] foster care can be used to help
[1:36:30] others. A mother who's deprived
[1:36:32] case had been ongoing for over
[1:36:34] two years stated to her parent
[1:36:34] mentor
[1:36:36] that she did not believe her
[1:36:38] attorney when he told her she
[1:36:40] would be getting help from an
[1:36:42] interdisciplinary team she
[1:36:42] thought it was just more words
[1:36:44] coming out of her attorney's
[1:36:46] mouth. Months later the mother
[1:36:48] told her parent mentor that she
[1:36:49] would not be in trial
[1:36:50] reunification without the
[1:36:52] mentor's help the mother said I
[1:36:54] didn't know or understand what
[1:36:58] DHS or the court wanted from me
[1:36:59] and I felt hopeless
[1:37:02] now I get it and we are going to
[1:37:04] be all right a mother stated to
[1:37:06] her indisciplinary
[1:37:08] interdisciplinary team social
[1:37:10] worker my attorney really fought
[1:37:12] for me this is the first time
[1:37:12] someone fought for me like that
[1:37:16] wodHS district directors from
[1:37:18] two different regions recently
[1:37:20] stated to us cases resolve
[1:37:22] faster with OFR and more
[1:37:23] reunifications occur.
[1:37:28] Senator Hicks asked me to talk
[1:37:30] about due process so I added
[1:37:32] this slide and it is with great
[1:37:36] pride that I get to say that OFR
[1:37:38] got this result for an
[1:37:40] incarcerated mother. This
[1:37:42] opinion just came out late early
[1:37:44] last week I think it was Tuesday
[1:37:46] afternoon and is the full
[1:37:46] opinion is on the front page of
[1:37:47] OSCN.
[1:37:50] The Oklahoma Supreme court found
[1:37:51] that this mother
[1:37:56] did not receive due process or
[1:37:56] effective representation of
[1:37:58] counsel in her case
[1:38:02] herr case was from2023 an OFR
[1:38:06] became aware of her case in
[1:38:10] august of2024 it went through a
[1:38:12] process in the trial courts and
[1:38:14] then the court ofiv appeals and
[1:38:16] then a petition for certiary to
[1:38:18] the Oklahoma Supreme Court
[1:38:18] this past
[1:38:22] June I think and we received
[1:38:24] the opinion last Tuesday
[1:38:28] The Supreme court found that the
[1:38:30] trial court's duty to make and
[1:38:32] keep a legal record was not
[1:38:33] safeguarded
[1:38:38] the supreme court found that the
[1:38:40] court proceeded to termination
[1:38:40] of pro rights without the
[1:38:42] required safeguards and without
[1:38:44] a record demonstrating the
[1:38:47] safeguards the absence of the
[1:38:48] record is not merely an
[1:38:50] appellate inconvenience. It is a
[1:38:52] part of the due process problem
[1:38:56] in the any event the uncertainty
[1:38:58] about which procedural path the
[1:39:00] trial court took does not
[1:39:02] control the outcome because due
[1:39:04] process was denied under any
[1:39:06] plausible characterization of
[1:39:08] the april twenty9th proceeding
[1:39:10] which was a petition to
[1:39:12] vacate the termination of per
[1:39:14] rights the court the Supreme
[1:39:16] court overturned the petition to
[1:39:18] vacate and this case has been
[1:39:20] sent back to the trial court
[1:39:22] for further proceedings I
[1:39:23] highlight this case
[1:39:26] as well to mention an adoption
[1:39:28] had already taken place in this
[1:39:30] case and has been in place for
[1:39:34] two years so without effective
[1:39:34] legal representation in the
[1:39:36] trial court this is what can
[1:39:40] happen on an appeal and what
[1:39:42] can happen to an adoption where
[1:39:44] that family thinks their world
[1:39:46] is complete and done after two
[1:39:48] years and it may not be we don't
[1:39:49] know we don't know what's going
[1:39:49] to happen
[1:39:54] so that's why OFR is needed this
[1:39:54] case really illustrates why OFR
[1:39:56] is needed in all of our counties
[1:40:00] and with that I'll take any
[1:40:00] questions.
[1:40:04] Senator Hicks recognized for a
[1:40:05] question
[1:40:10] thank you Mr Chair. so with
[1:40:12] the the volume of trainings that
[1:40:14] you demonstrated are those the
[1:40:18] the trainings specifically
[1:40:20] for the mentors and the
[1:40:22] volunteers are those open to
[1:40:24] anyone I know that you stated
[1:40:26] that they were on your website
[1:40:28] but just specifically when
[1:40:28] we're thinking about ways in
[1:40:30] which we can help create
[1:40:34] more knowledgeable individuals
[1:40:36] in very you know
[1:40:38] very difficult and
[1:40:42] high conflict cases are are
[1:40:44] those trainings available for
[1:40:45] anyone to be able to access
[1:40:48] absolutely all of our trainings
[1:40:48] are available for anyone to
[1:40:49] access.
[1:40:50] we've had
[1:40:54] some40 of my closest colleagues
[1:40:56] from the state of Georgia attend
[1:40:57] a drug testing training that we
[1:40:57] gave.
[1:41:02] en ator Hicks for a follow up
[1:41:04] thank you Mr Chair you
[1:41:06] highlighted a master's level
[1:41:08] social worker. can you help me
[1:41:08] understand why that distinction
[1:41:09] is so important
[1:41:12] master's level social workers
[1:41:14] receive training they have
[1:41:18] expertise they have education
[1:41:20] in how to deal with systems and
[1:41:22] how to deal with case
[1:41:22] management. they also have
[1:41:24] clinical training but we don't
[1:41:26] use that part of their education
[1:41:28] they really do case management
[1:41:30] for us they do assessments for
[1:41:32] us they also guide and oversee
[1:41:34] our mentors and do reflective
[1:41:36] supervision with them and so
[1:41:38] they're training and expertise
[1:41:38] is of a caliber that
[1:41:40] is needed to navigate the child
[1:41:42] welfare system as well as the
[1:41:44] juvenile deprived court system
[1:41:45] because these families are now
[1:41:48] getting two systems when
[1:41:48] they're in the juvenile deprived
[1:41:49] court
[1:41:52] further questions
[1:41:58] a few from the chair. so
[1:42:00] august we'll start with the
[1:42:00] matter of xw that was just down
[1:42:02] the prior slide
[1:42:06] was the office of
[1:42:08] familymilypresentation involved
[1:42:12] in any of the appel appeals for
[1:42:14] that case or was it the
[1:42:15] claimants or
[1:42:18] I don't know appellate's own
[1:42:20] attorney or otherwise held
[1:42:24] council so OFR has a pellet
[1:42:26] panel of appellate attorneys
[1:42:26] that work for us that are
[1:42:28] contracted with us and one of
[1:42:30] our panel appellate attorneys
[1:42:31] did the work for this appeal
[1:42:36] how are their requests for
[1:42:38] representations? how are they
[1:42:40] reached to your level? are they
[1:42:41] assigned by the judge is are
[1:42:44] people able to directly reach
[1:42:45] out to OFR for representation?
[1:42:51] yes and no it's kind of your
[1:42:54] answer so what happens is is we
[1:42:56] contract with the trial lawyers
[1:42:58] and then we provide each judge
[1:43:00] with a benchc card and the
[1:43:00] benchc card tells the judged
[1:43:03] these are your OFR attorneys for
[1:43:04] your juvenile deprived cases in
[1:43:06] your county and they may use
[1:43:08] those to appoint for parent and
[1:43:10] child representation like
[1:43:10] judgedge conyers mentioned
[1:43:12] earlier today our lawyers in the
[1:43:14] rural counties you have to
[1:43:16] exempt Tulssonokklahoma County
[1:43:16] because they have the public
[1:43:17] defender who
[1:43:18] represents children but all
[1:43:20] other75 counties our lawyers
[1:43:22] will represent both parents and
[1:43:24] children on a rotating basis so
[1:43:25] they get that experience and
[1:43:28] knowledge from both sides and so
[1:43:28] the judged uses their benchc
[1:43:30] card for when a case comes in to
[1:43:32] appoint lawyers to the parents
[1:43:33] and to the children in the case
[1:43:36] so the judge makes that own
[1:43:38] determination themselves without
[1:43:40] any kind of request from
[1:43:42] a parent or anybody else
[1:43:43] involved.
[1:43:46] judgedge conyers is shaking her
[1:43:47] head now no it doesn't work that
[1:43:48] way but I can explain how it
[1:43:50] works and if she thinks I did it
[1:43:52] wrong she can jump in
[1:43:54] so what happens is when a case
[1:43:56] comes to before the judge in the
[1:43:58] emergency custody hearing our
[1:43:59] statutes say at that point in
[1:44:00] time the judge may appoint a
[1:44:04] lawyer for a parent a parent can
[1:44:05] request at that time there's
[1:44:06] only a few counties that appoint
[1:44:10] parents attorneys prior to that
[1:44:10] particular hearing it would be
[1:44:12] best practice for all parents to
[1:44:13] have their court appointed
[1:44:13] lawyer
[1:44:16] before that hearing. children
[1:44:18] are required to have a lawyer
[1:44:22] appointed at that hearing at
[1:44:22] the next hearing each county
[1:44:24] kind of does this different
[1:44:26] about the next hearing some
[1:44:28] counties insert a made up
[1:44:30] hearing and they call it like
[1:44:32] aer hearing or something like
[1:44:32] that or initial appearance
[1:44:34] hearing and at that time parents
[1:44:36] can fill out the pauper's
[1:44:38] affidavit which is different in
[1:44:40] all77 counties it's not uniform
[1:44:42] and they can then be a
[1:44:43] parents can then be appointed
[1:44:46] attorney at that hearing every
[1:44:48] parent should be appointed an
[1:44:48] attorney by the next hearing
[1:44:50] which is the adjudication
[1:44:52] hearing and children should
[1:44:54] most definitely have already had
[1:44:56] their attorney appointed by
[1:44:57] that point in time.
[1:45:04] my emotion process that
[1:45:10] yeah you'd have to come up to
[1:45:12] the microphone can identify
[1:45:12] yourself for the new statement
[1:45:18] atpecialjudge Kim conyers from
[1:45:18] Cleveland County so in my
[1:45:20] courtroom it it does progress
[1:45:22] much like that when parents come
[1:45:24] for the temporary emergency
[1:45:27] custody hearing which is after
[1:45:28] the initial custody order has
[1:45:32] been done that has to happen
[1:45:34] within two judicial days so a
[1:45:36] lot of times they do not have
[1:45:38] representation at that hearing.
[1:45:38] That is a very brief hearing
[1:45:41] before me just to determine if
[1:45:44] there's reasonable suspicion to
[1:45:44] continue to hold the child in D
[1:45:47] H S custody so it's a very brief
[1:45:50] hearing. I always allow them
[1:45:52] time to make any statements that
[1:45:54] they want to make or let me know
[1:45:56] any information that they feel
[1:45:57] like is important for me to know
[1:45:58] but most of the time the
[1:46:00] information I get at that
[1:46:00] hearing comes from the DHS
[1:46:01] worker
[1:46:04] Once a petition has been
[1:46:06] actually filed. my office goes
[1:46:08] to our lists and automatically
[1:46:10] appoints an attorney for the
[1:46:10] child or children
[1:46:14] at the very first we tell them
[1:46:15] at tell parents at the show
[1:46:16] cause hearing you need to have
[1:46:18] an attorney by your next hearing
[1:46:20] you have the option to hire an
[1:46:22] attorney if you cannot afford to
[1:46:24] hire an attorney then you can
[1:46:25] fill out a court appointed
[1:46:26] attorney application and I will
[1:46:27] consider that
[1:46:30] and appoint an attorney to
[1:46:32] represent you if appropriate.
[1:46:34] Now in practice I would love it
[1:46:36] if they would sit right down and
[1:46:37] just fill out that application
[1:46:38] so I could have that attorney in
[1:46:39] place for them by the time they
[1:46:40] come back
[1:46:44] in reality despite the fact that
[1:46:47] I say every single time do not
[1:46:49] wait until the day before to
[1:46:52] return this form to my office I
[1:46:53] get them back in my office the
[1:46:54] day before their next court
[1:46:55] hearing
[1:46:58] If that happens and they don't
[1:46:59] have an attorney, I go ahead and
[1:47:00] appoint an attorney at that
[1:47:04] hearing and we reset the initial
[1:47:06] adjudication or arraignment on
[1:47:10] that petition. I I don't proceed
[1:47:11] unless they insist on proceeding
[1:47:14] prose, I don't proceed to the
[1:47:16] adjudication stage without them
[1:47:17] having that attorney in place.
[1:47:22] and I just keep a a running list
[1:47:26] of my OFR contractors and it's
[1:47:28] kind of next man up as long as
[1:47:30] they don't have a conflict
[1:47:32] from handling a case previously
[1:47:34] or being involved with the
[1:47:34] family in some other way.
[1:47:40] you of those attorneys then
[1:47:42] what is the case load typically
[1:47:44] within an OFR attorney somebody
[1:47:45] that's contracted judged Coners
[1:47:46] if you would turn off your mic
[1:47:51] our caseload and compensation
[1:47:53] schedule is on our website and
[1:47:56] so there's really not a typical
[1:47:58] average caseload. it depends on
[1:48:02] the area of the state so intulsa
[1:48:04] most of those lawyers are on a
[1:48:06] caseload of60 to 80 cases we try
[1:48:08] to keep them in the middle of
[1:48:10] that caseload range and then
[1:48:13] they it goes down from that
[1:48:15] by statute are enabling statute
[1:48:16] they can't have more than 80
[1:48:17] cases national practice
[1:48:21] is a full time attorney doing
[1:48:22] this work shouldn't have more
[1:48:24] than60 parents on their
[1:48:28] caseload and so we go from 1
[1:48:32] to twenty,20 to40,40 to60 and
[1:48:33] then60 to 80.
[1:48:36] are our caseloads and very few
[1:48:36] might have
[1:48:38] we might tweak that just a
[1:48:39] little bit
[1:48:43] are all the attorneys contract
[1:48:45] attorneys within communities or
[1:48:46] are there some actually within
[1:48:47] the statewide office that go out
[1:48:47] to trials
[1:48:51] by the enabling statute no one
[1:48:53] in my office is allowed to have
[1:48:55] client contact except for the
[1:48:57] managing attorney of appellate
[1:49:00] practice and he may be he is
[1:49:02] able to decide if he wants to
[1:49:04] keep an appeal that's come to
[1:49:06] him to be assigned and if he
[1:49:08] wants to do it himself so all
[1:49:09] the trial attorneys and the
[1:49:10] other appellate attorneys are on
[1:49:11] contract.
[1:49:15] you said compensation is posted
[1:49:18] on the website iss it a per case
[1:49:18] per hour how is that
[1:49:20] compensation determined it's a
[1:49:24] flat fee so the contractors that
[1:49:25] have the60 to 80 caseload our
[1:49:26] highest caseload range get a
[1:49:27] flat fee of $8000 a month.
[1:49:32] and they are required to do high
[1:49:34] quality legal representation to
[1:49:37] keep their contract which is
[1:49:38] not like what they were doing
[1:49:39] prior to OFR.
[1:49:42] When
[1:49:46] contract attorney is involved
[1:49:48] what is the typical resolution
[1:49:49] you said in one of these that it
[1:49:54] comes in one of the slides said
[1:49:56] faster reunification is that the
[1:49:58] typical outcome are there other
[1:50:00] recommendations that come
[1:50:02] through and then obviously how
[1:50:04] does this square with your you
[1:50:07] know don't represent the best
[1:50:08] interest of the child that's
[1:50:10] forcasa so well it's by statute
[1:50:12] the legislature put that in
[1:50:14] statute how children are
[1:50:16] represented and it's entitled
[1:50:20] today 1-4-306 and so how these
[1:50:21] out
[1:50:24] com es are determined by clients
[1:50:26] clients direct lawyers with
[1:50:28] what they want to be their
[1:50:30] family preservation and to see
[1:50:32] their out to see what happens in
[1:50:32] one of these cases so if you're
[1:50:34] a parent lawyer you sit down you
[1:50:36] talk to your client you inform
[1:50:38] them and counsel them about the
[1:50:39] law and you find out what they
[1:50:42] want for their family and in
[1:50:43] this case and then the lawyer
[1:50:44] goes to work to accomplish that.
[1:50:47] Lawyers are also tasked under
[1:50:48] the law to be counselors at law
[1:50:50] and so when your client comes to
[1:50:51] you with an outrageous request
[1:50:54] of course you might counsel them
[1:50:55] that we can't do that but then
[1:50:56] in the end if that's what they
[1:50:58] ask, did you go before Judge
[1:51:00] conyers and you look and you
[1:51:01] make that statement of what your
[1:51:02] client has asked you to do
[1:51:04] there's lots of people in the
[1:51:06] courtroom to safeguard the best
[1:51:07] interests of children and the
[1:51:10] main person is the judge as well
[1:51:11] asassa and as well as the
[1:51:13] district attorney if a child
[1:51:15] wants to go home a 12 year old
[1:51:16] wants to go home and their
[1:51:18] mother father hasn't healed or
[1:51:19] corrected the conditions from
[1:51:20] which the judge has ordered them
[1:51:21] to correct it is
[1:51:23] in the child tells their
[1:51:23] attorney I want to go home
[1:51:26] the attorney of the child has to
[1:51:27] go in there and tell judgedge
[1:51:29] conyers I want to go home and
[1:51:30] then there's all the other folks
[1:51:32] that are in that room to
[1:51:33] safeguard and represent the best
[1:51:34] interests of the child to
[1:51:35] judgedge conyers and then she
[1:51:37] makes the final decision of what
[1:51:38] is in the best interests of that
[1:51:38] child.
[1:51:46] one of the other things that I
[1:51:47] had pulled out was your
[1:51:48] presentation was money from the
[1:51:50] legislature for full expansion
[1:51:52] what what will be your budget
[1:51:53] request
[1:51:56] going forward for full
[1:51:57] implementation and what do you
[1:51:57] see this program going
[1:52:00] with current budget and then
[1:52:04] you know again what your request
[1:52:06] will be I think in previous
[1:52:07] presentations to the legislature
[1:52:10] that are not mine as I am not
[1:52:12] allowed to lobby the legislature
[1:52:14] but previous documentation is
[1:52:16] shown to the legislature that
[1:52:17] the full budget for the Oklahoma
[1:52:18] office the family representation
[1:52:20] in all77 counties is about20
[1:52:21] million dollars.
[1:52:25] what has been or what is part of
[1:52:28] the current budget for OFR and
[1:52:30] your contract. the legislature
[1:52:32] has appropriated for the last
[1:52:33] few years $10.5 million.
[1:52:39] thank you any further questions
[1:52:39] committee members present
[1:52:44] all right thank you appreciate
[1:52:45] you being here today. Senator
[1:52:46] Hicks you're recognized for
[1:52:47] introduction of the your next
[1:52:47] speaker.
[1:52:52] thank you Mr chairir at this
[1:52:54] time we have our final
[1:52:56] presenter this isill Walsh and
[1:52:58] she is the grandmother
[1:52:58] ofelizabeth Feaster.
[1:53:27] Thank you for allowing me the
[1:53:27] privilege
[1:53:30] to tell you about our girl
[1:53:31] Lizzie rose
[1:53:34] and today I wear pink for Lizzie
[1:53:37] and we wear pink for Lizzie
[1:53:46] Elizabeth rose feaster entered
[1:53:48] this world august22,2018.
[1:53:52] from day one she captured the
[1:53:53] hearts of everyone she met
[1:53:58] She was love. she was laughter
[1:53:58] and she was full of light.
[1:54:02] she gave the best hugs and was
[1:54:03] the snuggliest of all snugglers.
[1:54:10] She loved ice cream, popsicles
[1:54:10] and blue ring pops.
[1:54:14] flue was her favorite flavor
[1:54:20] She's show appreciation for pop
[1:54:24] pop's dinners with a loud m m
[1:54:25] and a big thumbs up
[1:54:30] she loved her life or lived her
[1:54:32] life with such unapologetic
[1:54:33] gusto
[1:54:35] that I want to be her when I
[1:54:35] grow up
[1:54:40] herr older brother Aidean was
[1:54:41] always by her side
[1:54:44] something was a little scary or
[1:54:45] she hadn't warmed up yet.
[1:54:47] she would stand by her big
[1:54:47] brother
[1:54:51] and without a word without a
[1:54:51] thought
[1:54:55] their hands would clasp together
[1:54:56] that's trust that's love.
[1:54:59] Lizzie had her hero
[1:55:00] She called her mom
[1:55:06] She was so proud to have her
[1:55:07] mamma help people by taking 911
[1:55:07] calls
[1:55:12] and she wanted to take 911 calls
[1:55:12] like her mama when she got big.
[1:55:16] Lizzie and I had our own special
[1:55:18] things. We left shopping at ive
[1:55:19] below on the weekends
[1:55:22] We made up songs for everything
[1:55:26] ed lock red lights potty
[1:55:28] training just loving each other
[1:55:29] everything
[1:55:32] we love to go swimming and she
[1:55:34] would stay from open to close if
[1:55:35] I let her
[1:55:36] We had so much fun
[1:55:40] shared so many laughs
[1:55:50] Lizzie loved to be loud. She
[1:55:51] would sing in the shower at the
[1:55:52] top of her lungs and in the car
[1:55:54] and in the room and anywhere she
[1:55:55] was at
[1:55:58] when she was mad she would also
[1:55:59] make sure you were aware
[1:56:00] and she would tromp through the
[1:56:02] house sounding like a herd of
[1:56:03] elephants.
[1:56:05] Lizzie loved swimming roller
[1:56:05] skating and swimming
[1:56:06] really loved swimming
[1:56:12] she loved her 50 plus stuffies
[1:56:13] and each one had their own
[1:56:13] special name.
[1:56:18] over that summer we went on her
[1:56:20] first water slide together and I
[1:56:22] will never forget the look on
[1:56:23] her face.
[1:56:28] Lizzie was a bright, creative
[1:56:29] and clever child.
[1:56:32] she surrounded herself with her
[1:56:36] stuffies balloons and boxes that
[1:56:36] she would turn into something
[1:56:37] magical.
[1:56:40] she was always creating art
[1:56:44] playing makebelieve and singing
[1:56:46] her favorite songs she saw joy
[1:56:47] impossibility
[1:56:50] and everything around her
[1:56:56] e li z ab e th rotheaster left
[1:56:57] this world on June twentyninth.
[1:56:58] 2025
[1:57:02] She was 6 years,10 months.
[1:57:04] and7 days
[1:57:10] She'd been so excited to be
[1:57:10] going into the2nd grade.
[1:57:14] so excited to pull that wiggly
[1:57:16] tooth that just wasn't quite
[1:57:16] ready
[1:57:20] and so excited to eat taffy and
[1:57:21] chew gum once her silver tooth
[1:57:21] fell out.
[1:57:28] Lizzie was shot in the back by
[1:57:30] her biological father in her
[1:57:31] grandma's backyard.
[1:57:33] he then turned the gun on
[1:57:33] himself
[1:57:36] herr autopsy revealed
[1:57:39] she had been sexually abused by
[1:57:39] him
[1:57:44] lizzie didn't want to go that
[1:57:47] weekend, I asked why she said
[1:57:47] because her dad was there
[1:57:51] I asked all the questions
[1:57:54] maybe I didn't ask the right
[1:57:54] one. I don't know.
[1:58:00] I told her just to hang out with
[1:58:01] grandma.
[1:58:02] I didn't piece it together
[1:58:05] till after the fact
[1:58:10] now her father didn't allow her
[1:58:11] to go in her grandma's bedroom.
[1:58:13] and that's where grandma was
[1:58:18] Lizzie had no safe haven from
[1:58:19] her abuser
[1:58:20] and again
[1:58:26] this occurred under court
[1:58:27] ordered supervised
[1:58:30] overnight visitation
[1:58:36] The Oklahoma County DA's office
[1:58:38] is not pressing any charges
[1:58:40] because grandma didn't know she
[1:58:40] had to keep eyes on Lizzie and
[1:58:41] Aidan.
[1:58:44] the city of bethany Police
[1:58:47] Department, Oklahoma DHS were
[1:58:48] contacted in October2024
[1:58:52] when Lindsay and aided witnessed
[1:58:54] a physical domestic dispute
[1:58:55] between their father and their
[1:58:55] grandfather.
[1:58:58] bethany Pd took a report
[1:59:02] but didn't know what to do with
[1:59:03] it since the kids were not hurt.
[1:59:07] DHS did a surprise popin visit.
[1:59:09] at my daughter's home
[1:59:12] and made an appointment with the
[1:59:13] father.
[1:59:17] these two brave kiddos wanted to
[1:59:18] tell the police they were
[1:59:20] worried about grandma and
[1:59:22] grandfather and they were scared
[1:59:23] for their own safety
[1:59:24] my daughter
[1:59:26] was treated
[1:59:30] like a bitter baby mama
[1:59:34] I talked to the grandfather
[1:59:38] and begged them to get help
[1:59:41] that we were scared for their
[1:59:41] safety
[1:59:45] he told me he could handle him
[1:59:51] the kids kids did not go back
[1:59:54] over for visitation until DHS
[1:59:56] talked with them and gave the it
[1:59:56] was safe.
[1:59:58] that was in December2024.
[2:00:04] when custody proceedings began
[2:00:06] in December2018, my daughter
[2:00:08] sought and was granted avPO.
[2:00:10] for herself and her children
[2:00:12] they moved into my home
[2:00:18] wo days later I receive a phone
[2:00:20] call from my oldest son saying
[2:00:22] please were at her house. my
[2:00:23] daughter had to leave and they
[2:00:23] were going to take the kids
[2:00:27] I got home as fast as I could.
[2:00:34] a false retaliatoryvPO was filed
[2:00:35] by the father.
[2:00:39] my daughter had to leave my home
[2:00:43] and I was granted guardianship
[2:00:44] over the kids through DhS.
[2:00:46] court was a joke
[2:00:52] the judge was unjustly mean and
[2:00:53] hard on my daughter
[2:00:56] called her a liar because of
[2:00:57] what he wrote when he filed hisv
[2:00:57] pm
[2:01:02] made a point to embarrass her
[2:01:04] for wearing her work clothes
[2:01:05] which were black slacks in a
[2:01:05] polo top.
[2:01:09] because she came directly from
[2:01:09] work
[2:01:13] and was going straight back
[2:01:13] after
[2:01:13] court
[2:01:20] Their father fought with the
[2:01:21] daycare
[2:01:24] because they wouldn't let him
[2:01:25] take them out of the building
[2:01:26] alone and supervised
[2:01:31] he called the family counselor
[2:01:32] horrible names and threatened
[2:01:33] her
[2:01:34] all of which the judge knew and
[2:01:37] did not address other than a
[2:01:37] question to the grandmother.
[2:01:40] you didn't raise him to do that
[2:01:41] right?
[2:01:43] of course she went right
[2:01:48] he did not attend the mandatory
[2:01:50] domestic violence classes. he
[2:01:51] did not have the court ordered
[2:01:52] psyche evaluation completed. he
[2:01:54] did not intend individual
[2:01:57] counseling and he continued to
[2:01:59] harass my daughter, drive by her
[2:02:00] house until she started working
[2:02:04] at 911 and please heavily
[2:02:06] patrolled her neighborhood and
[2:02:08] walked her to and from her car
[2:02:09] daily
[2:02:14] and he continued just to do
[2:02:14] whatever he wanted
[2:02:20] We trusted the court system
[2:02:22] we trusted DHS
[2:02:28] without their
[2:02:33] father's participation in any of
[2:02:36] the required tasks he was still
[2:02:38] granted overnight visitation
[2:02:42] that should never have been an
[2:02:43] option
[2:02:48] without clear standards
[2:02:48] supervision provided may be
[2:02:49] inconsistent
[2:02:52] passive or ineffective
[2:02:54] leaving children vulnerable
[2:02:58] Lindsay was left vulnerable
[2:03:02] and paid the price
[2:03:04] with her innocence
[2:03:06] in her life
[2:03:13] please help me
[2:03:16] please help Senator Hicks
[2:03:20] add another layer of safety for
[2:03:21] these children
[2:03:24] there's a strong correlation
[2:03:25] between the state of Oklahoma
[2:03:28] being number50 in education
[2:03:32] and number one in domestic
[2:03:33] violence
[2:03:36] Children can't learn ABCs
[2:03:37] if their little minds
[2:03:40] are learning to survive
[2:03:48] senator Higgs
[2:03:52] thank you Mr Chair and thank you
[2:03:55] so much for being here. would
[2:03:56] you like to stand for questions
[2:03:57] or absolutely
[2:03:59] OK I'll open it up to my
[2:03:59] colleagues
[2:04:02] are there questions
[2:04:08] ma'am appreciate you being here
[2:04:09] today and
[2:04:12] giving testimony and sharing the
[2:04:13] story of Lizzie on this
[2:04:16] I can understand your
[2:04:18] frustrations court system
[2:04:19] especially given personal
[2:04:22] experience that you had with
[2:04:23] it
[2:04:26] my question again we're
[2:04:28] trying to figure out what can be
[2:04:32] best going forward you know
[2:04:34] when could intervention and what
[2:04:34] could intervention have looked
[2:04:35] like
[2:04:38] earlier to have prevented this
[2:04:40] again judges have dockets that
[2:04:42] they have to look at they have
[2:04:43] to take testimony
[2:04:46] and they have to weigh that
[2:04:47] on their own so at what point
[2:04:50] could intervention have come in
[2:04:52] that potentially could have
[2:04:53] saved Lizzie's life in your
[2:04:54] view. theres several things the
[2:04:55] first thing
[2:04:56] is
[2:05:00] in the beginning I was a
[2:05:03] supervisor for my daughter's
[2:05:04] visitation once thatvPO went out
[2:05:08] so I was her supervisor and his
[2:05:09] mother was his supervisor
[2:05:12] I knew the rules
[2:05:16] she said she didn't
[2:05:20] we did not have a class. we did
[2:05:22] not have a sheet of paper for a
[2:05:23] checklist we had nothing
[2:05:27] but I knew that I had to keep my
[2:05:30] eyes on these kids around my
[2:05:32] daughter even though I trusted
[2:05:33] her 100%. I treated her like a
[2:05:33] criminal.
[2:05:37] that's what was required of me.
[2:05:43] that was not being he was not
[2:05:44] being held to that same standard
[2:05:47] Again we did not have
[2:05:50] a guideline to go through.
[2:05:54] I also think domestic violence
[2:05:56] and classes should be given
[2:06:02] to the supervisors as well
[2:06:03] because of domestic violence is
[2:06:03] going on
[2:06:06] if you're in the middle of it,
[2:06:07] sometimes you can't see it
[2:06:12] but once you start talking to
[2:06:13] people and you're talking in
[2:06:15] group that comes out and you're
[2:06:17] like oh my that's that happens
[2:06:18] to me that's not normal
[2:06:26] so I think education for these
[2:06:26] supervisors
[2:06:28] they need to know what they're
[2:06:29] getting into
[2:06:32] they need to know their
[2:06:32] responsibilities
[2:06:36] and they need to know when they
[2:06:37] need to stop it
[2:06:40] when they need to remove that
[2:06:42] child when they need to back
[2:06:43] away and go hey I don't think I
[2:06:44] can do this safely anymore
[2:06:47] that never happens
[2:06:52] we made several
[2:06:56] attempts talking to DhS and then
[2:06:57] talking through the attorneys
[2:07:02] in everything we said
[2:07:06] well we found out that he took
[2:07:08] them to a store just a
[2:07:10] convenience store but again that
[2:07:11] was not supposed to happen
[2:07:13] turned it into DHS
[2:07:16] nothingthing was done or said
[2:07:21] so why why even why even bother
[2:07:22] with the system if we're not
[2:07:23] going to make them follow the
[2:07:24] rules
[2:07:27] and I know we had a lot of
[2:07:28] guidelines in place
[2:07:31] it needs to be more than
[2:07:31] guidelines
[2:07:36] when domestic violence is
[2:07:40] involved at any level because if
[2:07:42] they're doing it to the parent,
[2:07:44] they're doing it to the children
[2:07:44] even if it's just
[2:07:46] secondhand.hink of it like
[2:07:47] smoking
[2:07:50] someone may be smoking it's
[2:07:50] still going to affect this
[2:07:51] little one over here
[2:08:04] looking at that I pulled up OSCN
[2:08:04] you know
[2:08:06] allegations on the father
[2:08:07] charges on the father there were
[2:08:09] no criminal allegations or
[2:08:09] criminal charges against him
[2:08:12] at any time there was a couple
[2:08:14] of traffic tickets there also
[2:08:16] was a protective order looks
[2:08:17] like possibly filed by your
[2:08:18] daughter you know how
[2:08:24] how can we create a system that
[2:08:28] you know doesn't assume
[2:08:31] everybody is involved in Dv orsa
[2:08:32] and that's easy to do as well.
[2:08:33] There were steps in place
[2:08:36] that could have figured this
[2:08:38] out. he could have done the
[2:08:39] psyche evaluation
[2:08:42] that would show you right there
[2:08:43] it showed my daughter was a
[2:08:43] victim
[2:08:44] and
[2:08:47] she had been a victim of
[2:08:50] domestic violence and and it was
[2:08:51] not just a one day test
[2:08:54] she had to go back 3 and4 times
[2:08:55] it was $1000 test
[2:08:58] we went and took a loan to make
[2:08:59] sure that she could do that
[2:09:04] and one of his concerns was
[2:09:05] money. well
[2:09:09] there's a lot of things that
[2:09:09] would do for my kids
[2:09:14] if I had to sell plasma there's
[2:09:15] ways
[2:09:16] there's ways to get money
[2:09:19] there's organizations that are
[2:09:19] willing to help
[2:09:20] and I'm
[2:09:25] I've got so many things that I
[2:09:26] want to do inlizzie's name
[2:09:30] to help as well. I just got to
[2:09:31] figure it out
[2:09:35] so one of those things that we
[2:09:37] would put into law would be a
[2:09:38] strict compliance or zero
[2:09:40] tolerance do you think that
[2:09:40] that's
[2:09:44] the extent to where it would go
[2:09:47] of any any noncompliance then
[2:09:47] becomes a
[2:09:50] you essentially loss of
[2:09:52] visitation right it sounds like
[2:09:54] what you would be advocating for
[2:09:56] here is that how far you would
[2:09:58] go or I mean how do we look into
[2:10:00] again weighing for4 million
[2:10:02] Oklahomans whenever legislation
[2:10:04] comes through right now I am
[2:10:05] very
[2:10:08] I believe people can change. I
[2:10:10] have to believe they can prove
[2:10:12] that they have to prove that
[2:10:14] change but I believe they can
[2:10:16] change but what we're doing is
[2:10:17] we are holding these children
[2:10:20] like hostages they don't get a
[2:10:21] choice they don't get a say they
[2:10:23] get stuck with these parents who
[2:10:24] scare the bejesus out of them
[2:10:30] And I don't know if you've ever
[2:10:31] been in a room with people that
[2:10:31] you're terrified of but
[2:10:35] are you going to stand up and go
[2:10:36] he hurt me? absolutely not.
[2:10:40] we have to be able to listen to
[2:10:41] these kids and when they do talk
[2:10:44] pay attention and not say well
[2:10:46] your mom made you say that.
[2:10:48] Well, you know what? even if she
[2:10:49] did
[2:10:52] that's when the the therapy and
[2:10:54] the investigation and the
[2:10:55] psychevals come in
[2:10:56] there's ways
[2:11:00] to weed that out and once it
[2:11:02] starts getting weeded out less
[2:11:04] people are going to try and go
[2:11:05] that route because they're going
[2:11:07] to get found out right now it's
[2:11:08] just whatever goes
[2:11:11] now we could have been real
[2:11:14] nasty and real ugly we chose not
[2:11:16] to we're civil people. my
[2:11:16] daughter
[2:11:20] I was I was on the road to just
[2:11:21] don't send them just don't send
[2:11:22] them don't send them and she's
[2:11:23] like but mom
[2:11:24] that's their dad
[2:11:26] and they love him
[2:11:30] so whenever you say to me just
[2:11:34] I would not stop visitation
[2:11:35] without cause.
[2:11:38] and you always I think there
[2:11:40] should always be a chance to
[2:11:41] earn it back
[2:11:44] but you get to earn it back at
[2:11:45] the kid's speed
[2:11:46] when they're ready
[2:11:48] you do that work
[2:11:52] start with phone calls sart with
[2:11:54] our visitation
[2:11:56] you knows build up to it
[2:12:00] because I can be real good for
[2:12:01] 30 minutes.
[2:12:02] maybe not for five hours.
[2:12:07] it's more than just we're just
[2:12:08] getting little glimps in these
[2:12:10] lives and the glimpses that we
[2:12:11] see they're on their best
[2:12:12] behavior when we're in front of
[2:12:12] you
[2:12:19] any further questions committee
[2:12:19] members
[2:12:20] senator you're recognized
[2:12:28] thank you for being here did
[2:12:28] Lizzie have legal representation
[2:12:32] did have an ad item
[2:12:35] lizzie was an infant at that
[2:12:35] time
[2:12:39] and whenever our court
[2:12:42] proceedings started and by the
[2:12:43] time she passed away our case
[2:12:46] was already closed with the
[2:12:46] visitation set
[2:12:48] as
[2:12:52] as supervised it was standard
[2:12:53] supervision
[2:12:56] but supervised by his mother
[2:13:02] for as far as that how closely
[2:13:04] you're involved in that
[2:13:04] situation but as far as any kind
[2:13:08] of caseload do you feel like she
[2:13:10] got adequate representation you
[2:13:11] nobody can foresee these kinds
[2:13:12] of situations but whether
[2:13:15] signals or maybe missed because
[2:13:16] of a caseload situation in your
[2:13:17] opinion?
[2:13:20] no I think our attorneys were
[2:13:21] doing the best that they could
[2:13:25] and the attorney that we used is
[2:13:27] now a a judge in the juvenile
[2:13:27] courts
[2:13:33] I I think she was doing her due
[2:13:34] diligence but there were a lot
[2:13:38] of the the rules that we weren't
[2:13:40] aware of and and weren't made
[2:13:40] aware of and I don't know if it
[2:13:43] was an oversight or she just saw
[2:13:43] how it was moving
[2:13:47] and but one of the things that
[2:13:50] we did put in place was whenever
[2:13:53] the case did become closed in
[2:13:55] order for him to get that
[2:13:58] supervision removed he would
[2:14:01] have to do all the check marks
[2:14:02] he'd had to do the classes he
[2:14:03] had to do the
[2:14:07] the psych evaluation he had to
[2:14:08] do the counseling and not once
[2:14:09] did he ever make that effort to
[2:14:10] do it
[2:14:14] and that is a problem in itself.
[2:14:16] if you're not willing to do the
[2:14:16] work for your child
[2:14:18] to be better for your child
[2:14:21] and you see them struggling
[2:14:26] Step away
[2:14:28] you don't get that right
[2:14:32] I'm really tired of being
[2:14:38] so polite to the parents who
[2:14:40] they're the ones who have called
[2:14:41] to this mess
[2:14:43] I'm not saying all parents are
[2:14:44] bad
[2:14:48] I'm not saying situations don't
[2:14:49] come up. I'm from southeast
[2:14:51] Oklahoma I know I mean very poor
[2:14:51] little town
[2:14:56] I know how how things work and I
[2:14:57] know how people can overcome
[2:14:57] these things
[2:15:04] but it's got to be for the kids.
[2:15:06] We have to airr on the caution
[2:15:08] side of the kids
[2:15:13] said my daughter was treated
[2:15:15] like we were just bringing them
[2:15:16] up there just so they can tattle
[2:15:18] on their dad. no that wasn't it.
[2:15:20] When she picked them up they
[2:15:20] were hysterical
[2:15:24] Grandpa went through a wall
[2:15:31] when I talked to him about it
[2:15:32] like nothing happened
[2:15:34] but that's their own
[2:15:38] domestic violence issue that
[2:15:38] needs to be addressed.
[2:15:44] we say again you know we we let
[2:15:45] DHS know
[2:15:48] we let the police officers know
[2:15:52] and then my daughter went home
[2:15:52] and cried doubleub locked the
[2:15:54] door and her kids never played
[2:15:55] out in the front yard.
[2:15:56] they lived like prisoners
[2:16:00] and when Lizzie passed
[2:16:02] that was the worst day ever
[2:16:07] but when her dad went
[2:16:12] there was just relief because we
[2:16:13] still have one more.
[2:16:15] she has an older brother
[2:16:19] who's lost his dad and his
[2:16:19] sister
[2:16:26] further questions
[2:16:30] just a follow up on you know
[2:16:34] was there
[2:16:38] and so I know that the mom was
[2:16:40] the advocate in that situation
[2:16:42] of bringing forward
[2:16:46] the abuse you know
[2:16:48] allegations at that time
[2:16:50] probably should have been
[2:16:52] substantiated. did the children
[2:16:54] have direct contact with a
[2:16:58] court of appointed supervisor or
[2:17:00] attorney or we had a guardian ad
[2:17:04] litem and part of the DHS
[2:17:06] plan was they had individual
[2:17:08] counseling as much as they could
[2:17:10] they were 3 and6 months at the
[2:17:11] time I believe
[2:17:12] and
[2:17:16] so as much as as much as they
[2:17:18] could I visited with her quite
[2:17:22] often and you know aiden little
[2:17:24] toddler he fell and hit his head
[2:17:26] I would let her know we took him
[2:17:26] to the emergency room. this is
[2:17:28] what happened. you knowing we
[2:17:32] did was documented and got them
[2:17:33] through school and
[2:17:36] was that during the paternity
[2:17:37] determination or did that
[2:17:40] continue on and after visitation
[2:17:40] after this was after
[2:17:44] well this is while the case was
[2:17:46] still going on. I had them for a
[2:17:47] little over a year
[2:17:50] and before it was decided that
[2:17:52] my daughter had done what she
[2:17:54] needed to do and was granted
[2:17:54] full custody
[2:17:58] Any final questions
[2:18:06] ing onen hicks you're recognized
[2:18:06] for wrap up in the study
[2:18:10] thank you Mr Chair thank you so
[2:18:11] much for joining us today
[2:18:14] I know that we are past time
[2:18:16] but I prepared my remarks
[2:18:18] because I knew I was going to be
[2:18:20] emotional and I wanted to
[2:18:22] make sure that my
[2:18:24] colleagues've I've got the list
[2:18:28] the NCsL sent we didn't
[2:18:28] have anyone that was available
[2:18:30] to present this research but
[2:18:32] it is a national look and so I'm
[2:18:34] gonna reference some of that in
[2:18:35] my closing remarks
[2:18:36] I really want to thank each of
[2:18:38] our speakers for being here
[2:18:40] today and sharing your
[2:18:42] expertise, your experiences and
[2:18:44] in some cases deeply personal
[2:18:44] stories.
[2:18:46] I want to begin by recognizing
[2:18:47] something important.
[2:18:50] supervised visitation is not
[2:18:52] simply a scheduling arrangement
[2:18:54] or a procedural requirement in a
[2:18:54] court order.
[2:18:58] when a court orders supervised
[2:18:58] visitation it is making a
[2:19:00] determination that supervision
[2:19:04] is necessary to protect a child
[2:19:04] or another party
[2:19:08] Oklahoma law already recognizes
[2:19:08] that the health safety and
[2:19:10] welfare of the child are
[2:19:10] paramount when supervised
[2:19:12] visitation is ordered. That
[2:19:14] means we have a responsibility
[2:19:15] to ask a very basic question
[2:19:18] does the system we have today
[2:19:20] consistently provide the level
[2:19:24] of safety training documentation
[2:19:26] and accountability that families
[2:19:26] and courts are relying upon it
[2:19:27] to provide.
[2:19:30] I think today's testimony has
[2:19:31] helped us begin answering that
[2:19:31] question
[2:19:34] we heard about the role of the
[2:19:36] courts and the differences that
[2:19:37] can exist from one judicial
[2:19:38] district to another. We heard
[2:19:40] from child welfare professionals
[2:19:42] about family time and the
[2:19:42] practical challenges of
[2:19:44] providing services we heard from
[2:19:46] victim advocates in domestic
[2:19:48] violence professionals about
[2:19:49] safety planning and the
[2:19:50] realities of highrisk cases and
[2:19:52] we heard about the legal
[2:19:54] considerations surrounding
[2:19:54] parental rights and due process.
[2:19:56] and most importantly we heard
[2:19:57] Lizzie's story
[2:20:00] want to thank Joe Walsh for
[2:20:01] having the courage to share her
[2:20:01] granddaughter's story with us
[2:20:06] is easy when we're discussing
[2:20:08] statutes protocols, provider
[2:20:08] qualifications and court
[2:20:10] procedures to lose sight of the
[2:20:11] fact that behind every one of
[2:20:14] these cases is a child in a
[2:20:15] family whose lives are affected
[2:20:16] by the decisions that we make.
[2:20:18] Lizzie reminds us why this
[2:20:20] conversation continues to
[2:20:20] matter.
[2:20:22] one of the clearest lessons from
[2:20:24] today is that Oklahoma is not
[2:20:26] starting from zero. Our current
[2:20:28] law establishes the Oklahoma
[2:20:28] Child Supervised
[2:20:32] visitsitationgrame. it provides
[2:20:32] for trained volunteers, judicial
[2:20:34] district supervised visitation
[2:20:36] teams, training requirements,
[2:20:38] written protocols, background
[2:20:38] checks and fitness determination
[2:20:39] for volunteers.
[2:20:42] Oklahoma law also provides that
[2:20:44] volunteers must be able to see
[2:20:46] and hear the interactions
[2:20:48] between the supervised parent
[2:20:50] and child and it requires
[2:20:52] professional settings in certain
[2:20:54] circumstances involving suicidal
[2:20:56] or violent behavior unless
[2:20:57] additional conditions are met.
[2:20:59] those are important protections
[2:21:02] but today's discussion also
[2:21:03] raises an important issue.
[2:21:06] having standards and statute is
[2:21:08] not the same as having
[2:21:08] consistent standards in
[2:21:09] practice.
[2:21:12] The research provided by the
[2:21:14] national conference of state
[2:21:16] Legislature shows that other
[2:21:16] states have addressed and
[2:21:18] have addressed supervised
[2:21:20] visitation through more detailed
[2:21:24] statewide standards governing
[2:21:24] provider qualifications,
[2:21:28] training, background screening,
[2:21:28] security procedures
[2:21:30] documentation, termination of
[2:21:32] visits certification monitoring
[2:21:34] and data collection. Those
[2:21:36] examples give us an opportunity
[2:21:38] to consider what Oklahoma's next
[2:21:39] step could look like.
[2:21:42] as we continue examining the
[2:21:42] possibility of Lizzie's law, I
[2:21:44] believe we should keep several
[2:21:45] principles in front of us.
[2:21:48] first, safety must be the
[2:21:50] foundation a supervised
[2:21:52] visitation program should have
[2:21:52] clear procedures for assessing
[2:21:56] risk, conducting visits,
[2:21:57] responding to emergencies and
[2:21:58] ending a visit when safety
[2:21:59] becomes a concern.
[2:22:02] national guidance from the US
[2:22:04] Department of Justice emphasizes
[2:22:04] the safety of both children and
[2:22:06] adult victims in supervised
[2:22:08] visitation and safe exchange
[2:22:09] settings
[2:22:09] Second
[2:22:12] the people entrusted with
[2:22:14] supervising these visits must be
[2:22:16] properly prepared. That means
[2:22:18] asking whether there should be
[2:22:19] consistent statewide minimum
[2:22:20] qualifications, background
[2:22:22] checks and training for
[2:22:24] professional providers and where
[2:22:24] appropriate volunteers
[2:22:26] California for example
[2:22:28] established detailed
[2:22:30] qualifications and training
[2:22:30] requirements for professional
[2:22:32] providers including training
[2:22:34] related to child abuse reporting
[2:22:36] recordkeeping screening and
[2:22:38] termination of visitation child
[2:22:40] development, confidentiality,
[2:22:42] substance abuse and domestic
[2:22:43] violence.
[2:22:46] those are the kinds of questions
[2:22:46] that Oklahoma should continue
[2:22:47] examining
[2:22:50] hi rd there must be meaningful
[2:22:50] documentation
[2:22:52] if something happens during a
[2:22:56] supervised visit. if a court
[2:22:56] order is violated, a child
[2:22:58] becomes distressed an allegation
[2:23:00] of abuse arises or a visit must
[2:23:02] be interrupted or terminated.
[2:23:04] there needs to be a reliable
[2:23:04] record
[2:23:06] California's framework for
[2:23:08] example requires providers to
[2:23:10] maintain records of visits,
[2:23:12] attendance violations and
[2:23:12] incidents of abuse and to
[2:23:14] document interruptions or
[2:23:16] terminations of visits.
[2:23:18] Documentation is not about
[2:23:18] creating unnecessary
[2:23:20] bureaucracy. It is about
[2:23:22] ensuring that courts have
[2:23:22] accurate information when they
[2:23:24] make decisions affecting a
[2:23:25] child's safety.
[2:23:28] ourth, accountability requires
[2:23:30] oversight. We should ask who is
[2:23:32] responsible for establishing
[2:23:34] standards who verifies that
[2:23:36] providers meet those standards
[2:23:36] who receives complaints who
[2:23:38] monitors compliances and what
[2:23:39] happens when standards are not
[2:23:39] followed.
[2:23:42] Florida provides one example of
[2:23:44] a statewide approach that
[2:23:44] includes uniform standards
[2:23:46] certification, monitoring, data
[2:23:48] collection and an advisory
[2:23:50] structure involving courts law
[2:23:51] enforcement, supervised
[2:23:52] visitation providers and other
[2:23:54] stakeholders. Again these
[2:23:56] examples are not necessarily a
[2:23:58] blueprint for Oklahoma but they
[2:23:59] demonstrate that other states
[2:24:00] have recognized the need for
[2:24:01] consistency and accountability.
[2:24:04] and we also have to talk about
[2:24:05] access
[2:24:08] because at the same time
[2:24:10] accountability cannot come at
[2:24:12] the expense of access. We have
[2:24:12] to recognize the realities faced
[2:24:13] by families in rural Oklahoma
[2:24:16] a standard that exists on paper
[2:24:18] but cannot be accessed by a
[2:24:20] family because there's no
[2:24:20] qualified provider within a
[2:24:22] reasonable distance does not
[2:24:24] fully serve that family so as we
[2:24:26] consider stronger sta standards
[2:24:28] we must also consider provider
[2:24:30] capacity rural communities,
[2:24:32] affordability, transportation
[2:24:33] and sustainable funding
[2:24:36] safety and accessibility cannot
[2:24:38] be treated as competing values.
[2:24:38] We need to look for ways to
[2:24:39] address both
[2:24:42] we also heard an important
[2:24:44] reminder today that this
[2:24:46] conversation must respect due
[2:24:46] process and parental
[2:24:48] rightsrengthening supervised
[2:24:50] visitation standards does not
[2:24:52] mean eliminating the role of the
[2:24:53] courts or replacing judicial
[2:24:54] decision making with the
[2:24:56] statewide administrative system.
[2:24:58] It means giving courts and
[2:24:58] families a framework that is
[2:25:00] clear, consistent and safety
[2:25:02] informed. The goal should be to
[2:25:04] ensure that when a court
[2:25:04] determines supervise
[2:25:06] visititation is necessary, the
[2:25:08] supervision actually provides
[2:25:10] what the court intended a safe
[2:25:12] environment for the child and
[2:25:14] appropriate accountability for
[2:25:15] everyone involved.
[2:25:18] so where do we go from here for
[2:25:20] me the question coming out of
[2:25:21] today's study is not simply
[2:25:22] whether Oklahoma should have
[2:25:24] supervised visitation we already
[2:25:26] do. The question is whether we
[2:25:27] can make the system more
[2:25:30] consistent, more transparent,
[2:25:30] more accountable and more
[2:25:32] focused on safety and I believe
[2:25:34] today's testimony gives us
[2:25:35] several areas to continue
[2:25:35] examining.
[2:25:38] we owe it
[2:25:41] to the children we owe it to
[2:25:42] parents we owe it to
[2:25:44] grandparents and caregivers. We
[2:25:46] owe it to the professionals who
[2:25:48] are being asked to carry out
[2:25:50] these difficult responsibilities
[2:25:50] and ultimately we owe it to the
[2:25:51] integrity
[2:25:54] excuse me we owe it to the
[2:25:56] integrity of our court system.
[2:25:58] today's testimony has given us a
[2:26:00] great deal to consider and I'm
[2:26:00] very grateful to every person
[2:26:02] who contributed their expertise
[2:26:04] and their experience. Our
[2:26:06] responsibility now is to take
[2:26:08] what we've learned, continue
[2:26:09] listening to the people closest
[2:26:10] to this work, examine the
[2:26:12] evidence and determine what
[2:26:14] where Oklahoma can strengthen
[2:26:14] its approach.
[2:26:16] the purpose of this study is not
[2:26:18] to assume that we already have
[2:26:20] every answer. in fact I had very
[2:26:20] few answers when I started this
[2:26:21] study
[2:26:24] but it is to ensure that we are
[2:26:26] making a concerted effort to
[2:26:28] asking the right questions and I
[2:26:30] believe today has helped us to
[2:26:31] do that
[2:26:32] thank you Mr Chair
[2:26:38] thank you all for your
[2:26:38] participation in the study. I
[2:26:40] know that we have a few online
[2:26:41] as well. thank you for joining
[2:26:41] us virtually
[2:26:44] senator Hicks thank you for
[2:26:44] bringing this forward looking
[2:26:45] forward to
[2:26:48] seeing what legislation may come
[2:26:49] out of it at some point in the
[2:26:49] future
[2:26:52] seeing no further business
[2:26:54] before Senate judiciary our next
[2:26:56] meeting is scheduled for
[2:26:58] October6 interim study by fuller
[2:27:00] daniels it's a joint study with
[2:27:02] the house and then we'll have
[2:27:04] a follow up after that next one
[2:27:06] will be on 10 sens so members of
[2:27:08] the committee look forward to
[2:27:10] seeing you then having no
[2:27:10] further businessenate judiciary
[2:27:11] is adjourned