[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 16 (Tuesday, February 15, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E237]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             INTRODUCING THE KEEPING FAMILIES TOGETHER ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. FORTNEY PETE STARK

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 15, 2005

  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join Congressmen Ramstad and 
Kennedy in introducing the bipartisan, bicameral ``Keeping Families 
Together Act.'' This bill would help parents obtain necessary mental 
health treatment for their severely emotionally disturbed children 
without being forced to relinquish them into State custody to get that 
care. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Mark Pryor (D-AK) are 
introducing the companion legislation in the Senate.
  No family should be required to relinquish legal custody of their 
mentally ill child to a State child welfare agency or the juvenile 
justice system as their only means of obtaining desperately needed 
mental health services. Yet as Maryland resident Diana Miller recounted 
to me last year, State officials gave her this exact ultimatum when she 
sought potentially life-saving mental health care for her daughter, 
Erica.
  Tragically, Diana and Erica Miller are not alone in their 
predicament. In April 2003, the GAO reported that parents in 19 States 
placed over 12,700 children in State child welfare or juvenile justice 
agencies in 2001 to obtain mental health services for them. We know 
that the nationwide number is even higher because 31 States did not 
respond to the survey.
  According to GAO, these middle class parents find themselves trapped 
between not having the resources to pay for private mental health care 
and making too much money for their children to be eligible for 
Medicaid. Parents are therefore forced to choose between not treating 
their child's severe illness and transferring custody to the State, 
which has the resources to provide the necessary care. Families wind up 
torn apart at the expense of the taxpayers.
  A Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law further elaborated on the 
situations that cause parents and guardians to give up their seriously 
emotionally disturbed children to State agencies. These situations 
include the following:
  The family has either exhausted their private health insurance 
benefits, or their benefits do not cover required mental health 
services (e.g. Residential Treatment Program).
  The family lives in a State or jurisdiction in which Medicaid 
services do not adequately address mental health needs, and agency 
placement provides access or priority status for entry into needed 
care.
  The family lives in a State or jurisdiction in which children are 
deprived of federally mandated mental health services through the 
Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) as a result of an exceedingly 
restrictive definition of serious emotional illness. That is, these 
schools often label these children as solely ``discipline problems.''

  The family lives in a State or jurisdiction in which the local child 
welfare system erroneously interprets Federal law (Title IV-E of the 
Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Program) as requiring 
relinquishment of custody even for temporary out-of-home placements.
  As all of these reports highlight, families are acting out of 
desperation to get immediately needed mental health services for their 
children. The juvenile justice and child welfare systems have become 
the mental health providers of last resort for far too many families.
  Both the child welfare system and juvenile justice systems are ill-
equipped to meet these children's needs. Even worse, the psychological 
bond between parent and child is unnecessarily disrupted. Their 
children feel abandoned and their parents feel guilty over turning 
their parental rights and decisionmaking authority to a State agency.
  The stigma is real to families themselves and to those around them. 
Good parents don't have their children taken away. But, in fact, the 
need to relinquish custody in these instances doesn't have anything to 
do with parenting skills. It has everything to do with our system being 
broken and continuing to allow these children with significant mental 
health needs to fall through the cracks.
  We have known about this problem for many years. In fact, I first 
introduced legislation in 1995 attempting to address this issue. Since 
then I have been working with my colleagues to educate the public and 
other members of Congress about this issue and to find a bipartisan 
solution.
  Our legislation, the ``Keeping Families Together Act'' is the result 
of this bipartisan and bicameral process. Our bill provides new funding 
to States that are willing to develop systems that assure these 
children get the mental health services they need without pulling apart 
their families.
  It provides $55 million over 6 years in new family support grants to 
States that are willing to end the practice of child custody 
relinquishment and cover all these children's mental health services 
under Medicaid, CHIP or any other health program of their choosing. 
These monies can then be used to improve access to mental health and 
family support services that keep families together. They can also be 
used to create Statewide care coordination programs and to deliver 
mental health care and family support services for these families.
  Additionally, the bill establishes a Federal interagency task force. 
The task force will monitor the family support grants and work with 
representatives of affected families to make recommendations to 
Congress to improve mental health services and to foster interagency 
cooperation. The task force is also required to provide biannual 
reports to Congress on its progress in improving the delivery of mental 
health services to seriously ill children.
  The bill also provides States with the option of moving children out 
of hospital-based psychiatric care and into home- and community-based 
care options, which will allow them to remain with their families.
  The ``Keeping Families Together Act'' is an important first step 
toward eliminating child custody relinquishment. I look forward to 
working with my colleagues to quickly enact this legislation so States 
can develop innovative new programs that address these children's 
mental health needs while keeping their families together. Once we've 
learned what has effectively worked at the State level to restructure 
these programs, we will need to return to this issue at the Federal 
level and enact broad legislation to end the practice of forced child 
custody relinquishment nationwide.

                          ____________________