Committee hears bill to authorize infant safety devices as alternate safe‑surrender method

David Goff, staff to Representative Frank Tomaszewski, briefed the House Judiciary Committee on House Bill 64 on Feb. 13, 2026, describing the bill as an expansion of Alaska’s 2008 safe surrender law to permit the use of infant safety devices (commonly called "baby boxes") at designated facilities. The devices described in testimony would hold an infant in climate‑controlled conditions, include an internal camera and sensors to detect placement and weight, and immediately alert personnel so the child receives prompt attention.

Mr. Goff told the committee the devices would be authorized at hospitals, emergency departments, freestanding birth centers, private physician offices, rural clinics, municipal police departments, state trooper posts, fire departments, or other DFCS‑designated locations. He said the goal is to give a parent an option to relinquish an infant without directly engaging another person while ensuring immediate response and medical care.

Pamela Samash, president of Right to Life Interior Alaska, testified in favor, describing the dangers of infants being left outdoors and saying the boxes save lives while connecting parents to follow‑up care. Committee members pressed staff on operational details: Mr. Goff said the bill as drafted envisions an internal camera and silent alarm that notifies monitoring personnel, and that a standard "package" of information and resource materials typically accompanies the device although the bill does not mandate specific contents. He also clarified a statutory age limit under Alaska’s safe surrender law: the hearing record cites 21 days as the legal threshold for safe surrender in Alaska.

Members raised concerns that anonymous surrender might remove opportunities for intervention in cases of sexual or domestic violence or for medical care of the birthing parent; Mr. Goff responded that surrender to a person remains allowed under current law and that the bill’s focus is saving infants’ lives and facilitating timely care. Committee members also discussed the potential mismatch between internal cameras (designed to preserve anonymity) and external surveillance at many intended sites; Mr. Goff acknowledged the tension and said full anonymity cannot be guaranteed in a surveillance environment.

The committee set an amendment deadline for Thursday, Feb. 19 at 5 p.m., and set HB 64 aside for further consideration. No vote was taken at this hearing.