In recent weeks, the safe haven law that passed last session in the Unicameral has caused quite a stir in state government and the media. Several children, many of them teenagers, have been left at hospitals by a parent(s) or legal guardian(s), the majority with alleged behavioral or mental issues.

These events have raised some concern regarding the safe haven law that has been in effect since July. Is it working effectively, or not?

This law allows a parent or guardian to leave a child at a licensed hospital without being prosecuted for any crime based solely on the act of leaving the child. When the safe haven law is used by parent(s) or legal guardian(s) the hospitals and the Department of Health and Human Services have certain procedures that are used.

Hospitals have the ability to offer emergency counseling and to have social service agencies on standby to respond, so that parents can consider alternative options when in need of help before the child is abandoned.

According to a letter written by Todd Landry, the Director of the Division of Children and Family Services for the DHHS, they follow this current procedure.

First, a person leaves a child at a licensed hospital. Next, the hospital calls local law enforcement to inform them of a child being left at their facility. Law enforcement then places the child in DHHS temporary custody on emergency protective hold for up to 48 hours.

Only law enforcement has the authority to remove a child and place one into emergency protective custody. During the 48 hours, the county attorney decides whether to file a juvenile court petition and request to make the child a ward of the state. If it is determined, that it is safe to reunify the child to the parent(s) or legal guardian(s), the county attorney may not file a juvenile court petition.

Finally, if the county attorney files a juvenile court petition the court rules on the petition and either takes jurisdiction of the child and makes the child a ward of the state, or returns custody of the child to the parent(s) or legal guardian(s) and dismisses the petition.

When a child enters the juvenile court system the process is the same, no matter how they come into the system. Whether through the safe haven law, child abuse or neglect, either way, the ultimate goal of any juvenile case is reunification. Thus, using the safe haven law does not mean that a parent's responsibility to their child is immediately removed. No matter how the child entered the system, the parents are still responsible until the ultimate goal of reunification is granted, or until the child becomes a ward of the state.

The incidents involving teenagers being abandoned by the safe haven law is disconcerting, but before we panic, child protective services needs to be asking why parents with children having mental and behavioral needs feel this is their only option.

Currently, there are other options through the juvenile courts that can be used when a teenager with mental or behavioral problems needs help. These options include a "no fault" petition that requires treatment by a mental health professional and proof that the parent used all other options available.

"Uncontrollable" declaration is another option that requires a focus on the child's behavior. Are these options working efficiently? When a child is an immediate danger to themselves or family the more convenient option seems to be the use of the safe haven law. Again, why do parents believe this is the best option? Are the alternative options too slow and unresponsive? It may be that the safe haven law has highlighted other problems that need attention.

There are also alternative options for parents and guardians to avoid the juvenile court system. Some of these are community based services such as Cedars, Boys Town, Panhandle Partnership and the United Way. In addition, churches, faith based communities, and family support systems can be used when a parent needs help. Has the recent use of the new safe haven law revealed areas where we as community groups, churches, family, and neighbors have fallen short of our responsibilities? Are we as a community failing to help? These alternative options need encouragement so that they can open their doors and give families an opportunity to take advantage of non-governmental agencies before abandonment is used.

This bill may not be working as some legislators intended, but it is revealing needs and keeping children safe. Instead of panicking, let's see this as an opportunity to take a step back and ask the tough questions of ourselves as neighbors, friends, family, and the church. Moreover, let's not miss an opportunity to improve DHHS, by just focusing our attention on the intent of the safe haven law.

On Nov. 13, 2008, the Health and Human Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee will hold a joint hearing at the Capitol. Individuals that want to voice their opinion may come and testify.