Committee advances bill on sibling contact after adoption as lawyers warn definition may invite litigation

The House Health and Social Services Committee on April 7 advanced House Bill 157, which seeks to address post-adoption sibling contact by changing how siblings are defined in adoption decrees. Committee members and legal counsel focused on statutory definitions and potential legal consequences of the proposed language.

Carla Erickson, chief assistant attorney general in the Child Protection Section, told the committee the bill’s definition does not align with existing child-need-of-aid statutes and "when things are not defined, it can lend themselves to litigation." Erickson urged careful drafting and said certain sections feed into court determinations about post-adoption visitation and best interests of the minor.

Deputy Director Kim Swisher of the Office of Children's Services said the agency has not received specific feedback from licensed foster parents on the bill and characterized some expected effects as speculative. Swisher noted the bill would create a new category of adult family member, which might change the status of a nonrelative foster parent in some cases and could increase administrative notifications.

Representative Gray described two options for next steps in judiciary: remove the bill’s broad legal definition and preserve the intent as nonbinding guidance to judges, or narrow the statutory definition to align with existing statutes. Committee members also raised whether tribal adoption and ICWA/ECWA definitions should be treated differently; Erickson confirmed the state recognizes tribal adoptions and suggested inclusion is likely but needs language review.

Members discussed whether confidentiality rules in adoption decrees (transcript referenced statute s 25 23 1 50 subsection c) should be revisited to enable sibling contact; Erickson said she would need to review ramifications. After discussion, a member moved to report HB157 from committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes; there was no recorded objection and the chair announced HB157 passes from committee.

The committee’s action sends HB157 onward for further review, with several members indicating the judiciary committee is the appropriate venue for refining statutory definitions and addressing legal and confidentiality questions.