THE LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR DELAYED THE PINS BILL TO JULY 1, 2002

On November 1, 2001 the change in the law extending the age for Persons in Need of Supervision to 18 was supposed to go into effect. However, as a result of lobbying by, among others, The New York State Association of Counties, the New York Public Welfare Association, and the Council of Probation Administrators, the state legislature passed a bill delaying the implementation to July 1, 2002. This seven month delay disappointed those whose efforts over the past years came to fruition last December when Governor Pataki signed the bill into law after its overwhelming passage by both houses of the legislature.

Among the reasons given for requesting the delay were the fiscal implications of the 9/11 tragedy for the state and the counties. PRAFAC, however, wonders if those responsible for the law's implementation on November 1st were really prepared to do so even though they had more than 10 months to do the necessary planning.

The agency administrators also referred to the study done by the Vera Institute of Justice, a New York City based think tank. This report had been commissioned by the New York State Office of Children and Families. The study " ... examines the strengths and weaknesses of the current system and provides the first comprehensive projection of how many more children will enter under the new law.

Based on the Vera predictions, many county officials in New York State came to the unwarranted conclusion that this was something they could not afford. However, this type of backward thinking does not take into account that the county can pay for a much less expensive intervention for the additional youngsters now or pay for the higher cost of crime and jail that will most likely come later.

Despite the logic of our arguments, the governor and both houses of the legislature caved in and, therefore, the extension of PINS to 18 will not begin until July 1, 2002. The only silver lining that came out of these dark clouds was that, based upon our recommendations, every county in the state will be required to prepare and submit a plan for implementation by January 15, 2002. Also, we met with one of the governor's staff prior to the bill's enactment to present our views and we also met with a high official in the state Office of Children & Families after its passage to discuss our expectations regarding the new requirements for implementation. So we are one of the players in this complex process of enacting and implementing legislation. While we expressed our unhappiness with the delay and predicted that a cohort of 17-year-old youngsters and their parents will be disadvantaged, we noted our appreciation in becoming a participant that will be consulted before rather than after decisions have been made.

I would like to extend my appreciation to Lew Childs, Joan Reed, Judith Shaw, Ph.D., Tina Harris, Julie and Brittany, for contributing their testimonies on PRAFAC's website. Thanks are also due to Lew Childs for his time writing for the website and for the efforts of Jeff Thomas for his Cost/Benefit Analysis.

Additionally, a well-deserved and special thank you must be given to Joan Reed, my website partner and dear friend, for the many devoted hours that she worked helping me with the website and for her outstanding writing, proofreading and editing skills.

THURSDAY JUNE 15, 2000 AT 11:50 PM., BILL A1131b PASSED THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR!! WITH A VOTE OF 142 TO 1 FOLLOWING WITH THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE AND A STANDING OVATION!! THERE WAS NOT A DRY EYE IN THE HOUSE!! TO ALL ASSEMBLY MEMBERS, FROM FAMILIES OF NEW YORK WE THANK YOU!!

PUBLIC HEARING REPORT

This is a report from the notes some of us wrote down at the hearing.  A few comments that we recall hearing but didn't jot down are noted here and we tried to attribute them to the person we thought made each comment.  We didn't take notes of each speaker, only when something particularly struck one of us. With a lot of the parents, we knew their stories; so we didn't take notes on theirs, although they were all very compelling testimonies as to why the age of PINS and runaways should be raised to 18.  A court stenographer took down everything, and we will eventually be, and the transcribed testimony will be most accurate.

On June 2, 1999 Assembly Children & Families Committee Chairman Roger Green presided over an 8-hour public hearing in a packed hearing room in Albany regarding his bill A.4831 to raise PINS to 18. The hearing began with several members of the Children & Families Committee presiding with him along with Assemblyman Steve Kaufman, sponsor of bill A.1131.  One by one the others had to leave for other committee meetings, so Chairman Green presided alone for most of the afternoon.  While speakers were asked to limit their statements to 10 minutes, no one was prevented from finishing; and Chairman Green allowed all of our voices to be heard, including 3 people not originally on the list of speakers.

Many parents spoke in support of PINS to 18, and all had very compelling testimonies as to why the age of both PINS and runaways should be raised.  Three of them spoke of the success they had with PINS.  Some spoke of families and a cult who took our teenagers in against our will, and of our frustration in learning that wasn't against NYS law.  Florida's "Tough Love Law" that criminalizes harboring a runaway without notifying parents or police was brought up, and a copy of that law was faxed to Chairman Green the next day since he expressed interest in it.  The frustration of laws that prevent parents from getting their child into necessary treatment, and the right of that child to prevent parents from obtaining diagnoses, in spite of our responsibility for them until they're 21, was addressed.  Kids are given freedoms and rights by NYS before they're mature enough to handle them.  Agencies disseminate this information to teens via brochures and the Internet, and the information is discussed in high school health and law studies classes. A TOUGHLOVE® coordinator gets 70% of his calls from parents of kids 16 and over, and TOUGHLOVE® International is supporting PINS to 18 in NYS. The Committee was asked to work with the Senate to ensure that a PINS/Runaway bill that's passed by the Assembly will be acceptable to the Senate so that the result will be signed into law.

People who spoke against PINS to 18 were primarily concerned about whether there would be enough money given their agencies to handle the increased workload, and they indicated a need for more power from the state to be able to hold kids accountable through Family Court. Many people were alarmed to hear Probation Administration recommend that it's too late to help kids at 16 and to let it ride and handle them in criminal court later. Assemblywoman Gloria Davis, a member of the Children & Families Committee, said she was appalled at their attitude that it's OK to let these 16- to 18-year-old kids fall through the cracks.  She exclaimed she wasn't originally going to attend the hearing because she originally wasn't in favor of the bill, but she's changed her mind and is glad she came.  She said these kids are our FUTURES and that raising the age is just plain common sense.  THUNDEROUS applause from the parents followed her comments.  Two social workers who spoke later on were very much FOR raising the age as a way to get these kids into services, as were the treatment providers. Our sense of the service providers' position is that they are looking to the courts and PINS at 18 as a way to help get kids to the providers and to help to keep them there for services they might otherwise walk away from.

PRAFAC's position is that just by raising the age, it would give authority back to parents and that kids would likely stay at home till 18 if the law said they had to.  Many of our kids didn't exhibit problems or run away till 16, when it was too late for us to get them into any form of treatment without their consent or for police to return them to our supervision.

Several professional people testified in favor of raising the age.  Treatment professionals said treatment is necessary for these kids because emotional growth stops at the age a person picks up alcohol or other drugs.  PINS to 18 would obligate youth to deal with the issue, would return a sense of order to a child's life, and would protect all children under the law.  They have a large percentage of kids who access treatment through PINS referral, and there's a real gap for 16- and 17-year-olds in getting the help they need.  A county legislator and school board president said the law now is like putting a big club in the child's hands by giving them rights without responsibilities. Changing the law would make kids know the law is on the parents' side, would likely change a teenager's choices, and would likely result in more kids staying in school.  Why wouldn't NYS empower parents to raise their kids?  Legal Aid Society said the diversion program was advocated in a national study as a starting point.  A lawyer said while PINS is not a panacea, it's a first step; and if we don't take the first step, we can't take the second.  A social worker gave the definition of adolescence as being that brief period of time before reality sets in. Kids need the extra 2 years to mature and change their thinking.  If we do nothing or postpone action, is that in the best interest of the child; and aren't we here for the child?  If we wait for collaboration of the programs, these kids will continue to fall through the cracks.

Representatives from the NYS Police Juvenile Officers Association said they could detain and return a runaway up to age 20 if from out of state, but can't do the same for in-state youth that run from parental supervision.  They pointed out that Sections 718 and 732 of the Family Court Act need to be included in bill A.4831 in order to address the runaway issue.  Both sections were addressed in Kaufman's bill A.1131.  Chairman Green then promised to include those sections in his final legislation and that having not done so was an oversight on his part.

Chairman Green said that laws have created what he's heard termed a "youthocracy," that a subliminal message is going out to our kids that they're in charge.  He said the legislature needs to make a statement that parents are in charge, to set the tone, and that he thinks doing that will help counteract these messages.  He sees the need to get services to the kids, no matter how limited they may be at first.  He would like to move swiftly and will consider moving in incremental steps to get this underway.  He recognized from our testimonies that substance abuse was a big part of the picture and that it is "not epidemic, but pandemic - an overarching problem in a majority of these kids."

We felt it was a good hearing, with our concerns being heard and received by the hearing panel.  We left feeling that we accomplished something and that we probably changed some opinions.  Many of us were optimistic about the prospects for success in the 1999 session.  Roger Green appeared to be a very sincere and caring legislator who wants to help empower families and parents. The session went much longer than he probably anticipated, yet he didn't rush off after the hearing, staying for several minutes visiting with parents and posing for pictures with those of us who brought cameras.                                          (top)