Introduced Version
Senate Bill 200 History
| Email
Key: Green = existing Code. Red = new code to be enacted
Senate Bill No. 200
(By Senators Tomblin, Mr. President, White, Bailey, Edgell,
Unger, Love, Helmick, Minard, Minear, Harrison, Chafin, Facemyer,
Caruth, Boley, Weeks, Yoder, Kessler, Deem, Guills, Sprouse,
McCabe, Hunter, Barnes, Jenkins, Foster, Dempsey, Fanning and
Sharpe)
____________
[Introduced February 16, 2005; referred to the Committee
on the Judiciary; and then to the Committee on Finance.]
____________
A BILL to amend and reenact
§
49-5D-3a of the Code of West Virginia,
1931, as amended, relating to prohibiting out-of-state
placements unless out-of-state treatment or service is in the
best interests of the child or that the needed treatment or
service is not available in the state.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That
§
49-5D-3a of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended,
be amended and reenacted to read as follows:
ARTICLE 5D. MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS.
§
49-5D-3a. Recommendation of team to the court; hearing
requirement; required findings; prohibition on
out-of-state placements.
(a) In any case in which a multidisciplinary treatment team develops an individualized service plan for a child pursuant to the
provisions of section three of this article, the court shall review
the proposed service plan to determine if implementation of the plan
is in the child's best interests. If the multidisciplinary team
cannot agree on a plan or if the court determines not to adopt the
team's recommendations, it shall, upon motion or sua sponte,
schedule and hold within ten days of such determination, and prior
to the entry of an order placing the child in the custody of the
Department or in an out-of-home setting, a hearing to consider
evidence from the team as to its rationale for the proposed service
plan. If, after a hearing held pursuant to the provisions of this
section, the court does not adopt the teams's recommended service
plan, it shall make specific written findings as to why the team's
recommended service plan was not adopted.
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of this code to the contrary,
In in any case brought pursuant to any provision of this chapter in
which the court decides to order orders the child placed in an
out-of-state facility or program it shall set forth in the order
directing the placement the reasons why the child was not placed in
an in-state facility or program. the custody of the Department or
in an out-of-home setting, the court shall order that the child
receive services and treatment within the state unless the Secretary
of the Department of Health and Human Resources determines, and
certifies to the court, that out-of-state treatment or service is in the best interests of the child or that the needed treatment or
service is not available in the state.
NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to prohibit out-of-state
placements unless out-of-state treatment or service is in the best
interests of the child or that the needed treatment or service is
not available in the state.
Strike-throughs indicate language that would be stricken from
the present law, and underscoring indicates new language that would
be added.