Bill sets deadline to move kids out of foster-care limbo

There's widespread agreement that keeping kids in foster care for a long period of time isn't good for anyone.

They're less likely to be returned to their parents. They're more likely to bounce from one foster home to another. And they're likely to suffer emotional consequences.

Federal law, in fact, requires that states take steps toward "permanency" — a return to their parents or adoption, for example — within 15 months.

Yet it's not unusual for children to stay in foster care for years, languishing in a psychologically damaging limbo while the grown-ups try to figure things out. A January study by the state Administrative Office of the Courts showed that Washington meets the federal 15-month deadline only half the time.

A bill in the Legislature sponsored by Rep. Fred Jarrett, D-Mercer Island, is aimed at that problem. Under House Bill 3205, the state would be required to file legal papers to terminate parental rights if a child has been in foster care for 15 of the last 22 months.

The bill would allow exceptions to be granted by the courts for good cause. That includes if the child is being cared for by relatives, if the state has failed to provide the necessary services to the child's family, or if there is another compelling reason that termination would not be in the child's best interest.

"Fifteen months doesn't sound like a very long time to us sometimes, but if you're looking at it through the life of a child, that's a long time," said Cheryl Stephani, who heads the Children's Administration.

Jarrett says the bill won't necessarily mean more parents will lose their children; it just forces the Children's Administration and the Attorney General's Office, which represents them, to decide on a course of action. It's up to the courts to decide whether to terminate a parent's rights.

Opposition to the bill has been limited and mostly involves finer points, such as the definition of "good cause." For the most part, it mirrors federal law.

Stephani suspects the state hasn't been able to abide by the federal law partly because of crowded court dockets. Also, these cases are complicated. A parent might, for example, refuse drug treatment at first but then change his mind months down the road. That makes filing to terminate parental rights difficult.

Jarrett thinks the problem is deeper than that.

"My observation is there is absolutely no sense of urgency" among the state officials or the attorneys who represent them in court. "When I talk to them, I get these really nice bromides."

Jarrett is hopeful the bill will provide that urgency.

"This is one of these simple little bills that isn't really all that simple or little," he said. "What it does is provide us an opportunity to think about the way we change the system."

Jarrett said he expects the House to approve amendments to the bill today. After that, it will head to the governor.

Maureen O'Hagan: 206-464-2562 or mohagan@seattletimes.com