Newsom approves bill allowing 12-year-olds to consent to therapy and group homes.
A New California Law Allows Children to Consent to Mental Health Treatment Without Parental Consent
A groundbreaking bill has been signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in California, granting children ages 12 and older the right to consent to mental health treatment and even be placed in a residential shelter without parental consent. This law, known as Assembly Bill 655, removes the previous conditions of abuse or potential harm that were required for minors to consent to such treatment.
Related Stories
-
California Bill Allowing 12-Year-Olds to Consent to Counseling, Residential Services Sent to Governor
9/12/2023 -
Mental Health Bill Is ‘State-Sanctioned Kidnapping,’ Parental Rights Advocates Say
3/30/2023
Furthermore, mental health professionals are now required to consult with the minor before deciding whether to involve their parents or guardians in their treatment.
Under this new law, children aged 12 and older have the authority to consent to being placed in a residential shelter independently. Service providers must make their best efforts to notify the parent or guardian, but the child’s consent is the primary factor.
The bill defines “residential shelter services” as the provision of temporary or emergency support services to minors in a facility that exclusively serves minors. This includes governmental agencies, contracted agencies, community-funded agencies, and licensed community care facilities or crisis resolution centers.
However, there are concerns raised by opposition groups, such as parent and education advocacy organizations, including California Capitol Connection, California Parents Union, Our Duty, and Pacific Justice Institute. They argue that this law undermines parents’ rights and could potentially harm the child if they are separated from their parents without their knowledge.
California Capitol Connection expressed their opposition, stating that children should not be allowed to consent to mental health treatment without parental permission. They believe that parents play a crucial role in their child’s development and should not be excluded from decisions regarding their well-being.
On the other hand, supporters of the law, including child advocacy groups like California Alliance of Child and Family Services, California Children’s Trust, California Coalition for Youth, California High School Democrats, and The Children’s Partnership, view it as a matter of equity.
The Children’s Partnership, a co-sponsor of the bill, emphasized that the previous disparity between minors with private medical insurance and those under Medi-Cal has been addressed. While minors aged 12 and over could already consent to mental health services under private insurance, those under Medi-Cal were unable to do so. This law aims to eliminate this inequitable policy and ensure that all youth, regardless of their insurance, have access to critical mental health services.
The new law will take effect on July 1, 2024.
What provisions does the new law have in place to ensure that children have the necessary capacity and understanding to make informed decisions about their mental health
Ents or guardians within 24 hours of such placement, but the ultimate decision lies with the child. This is a significant departure from previous laws that required parental consent for any mental health treatment or placement outside the home.
The passing of Assembly Bill 655 has sparked a debate among experts and parents regarding the impact and implications of allowing children to make these decisions without parental consent. Supporters argue that this law empowers children and provides them with the autonomy to seek help when needed, especially in situations where parental consent may be withheld due to stigma, cultural barriers, or abuse within the family. They believe that mental health is a fundamental aspect of a child’s well-being and should not be dependent on parental approval.
On the other hand, opponents of the bill express concerns about the potential misuse and exploitation of vulnerable children. They worry that children may be coerced into making decisions they do not fully understand or be removed from their homes without adequate justification. They argue that parents have a fundamental right to be involved in their child’s mental health treatment and that this law undermines parental authority and responsibility.
Additionally, some critics question whether children, particularly younger adolescents, possess the maturity and understanding necessary to make informed decisions about their mental health. They argue that allowing children to make these choices without the guidance and support of their parents or guardians may lead to inappropriate or harmful decisions.
To address these concerns, the new law includes provisions that mental health professionals must assess the minor’s capacity to consent and consider the child’s best interests when deciding whether parental involvement is necessary. By involving the child in these decisions, it is expected that mental health professionals can better understand the child’s unique circumstances and provide appropriate care.
Assembly Bill 655 represents a significant shift in California’s approach to mental health treatment for minors. By recognizing children’s autonomy and right to access necessary care, this law aims to improve the well-being of California’s youth. However, it is also vital to ensure that safeguards are in place to protect children from potential exploitation or harm. Close monitoring and evaluation of the law’s implementation will be crucial in addressing any unintended consequences and making necessary adjustments to ensure the best interests of the child are upheld.
In conclusion, the passing of Assembly Bill 655 in California grants children aged 12 and older the right to consent to mental health treatment and placement in a residential shelter without parental consent. While this law has generated controversy, supporters argue that it empowers children to seek help when needed, while opponents express concerns about potential exploitation and parental rights. With provisions in place to assess capacity and consider the child’s best interests, the new law aims to strike a balance between children’s autonomy and their protection. Continued evaluation and adjustments will be crucial in ensuring the proper implementation and impact of this groundbreaking legislation.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...