Nebraska Adopts Safe Haven Law

Nebraska has been the only state without a safe haven law. Most states have
adopted a law allowing parents to drop off newborns within 72 hours of their
birth at designated locations. But the new Nebraska law allows parents, or
others like a baby sitter, to drop off older children up to age 19 at a
hospital.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,409262,00.html

This law has some interesting twists since there can be CS orders in place
for children more than 72 hours old.

Here it is..
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com:80/story/0,2933,409262,00.html

Nebraska Safe-Haven Law Permits Parents to Abandon Teens
Friday, August 22, 2008

OMAHA, Neb. - Nebraska's new safe-haven law allowing parents to abandon
unwanted children at hospitals with no questions asked is unique in a
significant way: It goes beyond babies and potentially permits the
abandonment of anyone under 19.
While lawmakers may not have intended it, the month-old law raises the
possibility that frustrated parents could drop off misbehaving teens or even
severely disabled older children with impunity.

"Whether the kid is disabled or unruly or just being a hormonal teenager,
the state is saying: 'Hey, we have a really easy option for you,"' said Adam
Pertman, executive director of a New York adoption institute and a frequent
critic of safe-haven laws.
Nebraska's approach is surprising because it is the last state in the nation
to adopt a safe-haven law.

But instead of following the lead of other states, which focus on the
abandonment of newborns, lawmakers here wanted to extend the protection to
all minors. And in Nebraska, that goes all the way up to age 19.

"All children deserve our protection," said Sen. Tom White, who helped
broaden the measure. "If we save one child from being abused, it's well,
well worth it."

White said it doesn't matter if that child is an infant or three years old
or in the care of a parent or baby sitter. As for what constitutes a minor,
he refers to common law, which interprets it to be anyone under age 14.

State Sen. Arnie Stuthman, who introduced the original bill dealing only
with infants, agreed to the compromise after the bill became stalled in
debate.

"The main interest I have is that it gives the mother or a parent another
option of what to do with a child before they do something drastic," he
said.

The measure, which took effect July 18, does not absolve people of possible
criminal charges -- for example, if a child had been beaten.

And since the law does not specify, it technically allows anyone, not just a
parent, to legally surrender custody. Most other states narrowly define the
role of the person surrendering the child.

Some hospitals have fielded questions from the public about the law, but no
children have been dropped off.

"I hope there never is one," Stuthman said.

Pertman, who directs the New York-based Evan B. Donaldson Adoption
Institute, said his research going back several years shows safe-haven laws
are not accomplishing what they intended. Women who are distressed enough to
want to abandon their children are not the ones reading billboards or
getting the message about these laws, he said.

Pertman finds Nebraska's law particularly alarming because it is not focused
on infants and parents.

Casting such a wide net "circumvents every rational practice in child
welfare that I'm aware of," he said. "That's as nicely as I can put it."

California, for example, allows parents to legally abandon a child at a
hospital or other designated safe zones within 72 hours of birth.

The brevity of the law could trigger litigation over its meaning, said
Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor.

"This law is obviously written in almost skeletal form," he said. "Drafters
will sometimes try to say as little as possible so they don't create
ambiguity, but drafters here succeeded in writing the law in such a limited
fashion that the entire provision is ambiguous."

Nebraska lawmakers acknowledge the courts will have to sort out the details,
and they have said they are open to revisiting the legislation if necessary.

The Nebraska Hospital Association has been working to help its 85 member
hospitals statewide establish procedures for dealing with abandonment cases.

Sen. Ernie Chambers, who voted against the law, said he would prefer to
address the reasons that parents abandon their children rather than offer
them safe haven.

"I don't think such laws are wise," he said.

Kathy Bigsby Moore, executive director of the child advocacy group Voices
for Children in Nebraska, said she also worries how the law might affect
adoption rates.

"The sad thing is we have plenty of other mechanisms for people to use," she
said. "I'm not sure the safe-haven law is really going to help in a majority
of cases."

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]

..
..
"Bob W" wrote in message
...
Nebraska has been the only state without a safe haven law. Most states
have
adopted a law allowing parents to drop off newborns within 72 hours of
their
birth at designated locations. But the new Nebraska law allows parents,
or
others like a baby sitter, to drop off older children up to age 19 at a
hospital.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,409262,00.html

This law has some interesting twists since there can be CS orders in place
for children more than 72 hours old.

"California, for example, allows parents to legally abandon a child at a
hospital or other designated safe zones within 72 hours of birth."
Since it says "parents", and a father is a parent, it follows that he too
can drop off the newborn. If he does so, is he protected from "child
support"? Also, if he takes the baby from the mother and drops it off, has
he committed the crime of kidnapping?

".... lawmakers here wanted to extend the protection to all minors. And in
Nebraska, that goes all the way up to age 19."
Either they don't allow 18 year olds to vote, or they allow children
(minors) to vote. Which is it?

"As for what constitutes a minor, he refers to common law, which interprets
it to be anyone under age 14."
But wait a minute, they just said a minor is someone under the age of 19! Am
I missing something here? Additionally, this last statement means that a 14
year old is a legal adult; yet such adult can be dropped off at a safe
haven. I give up.

"Chris" wrote in

But wait a minute, they just said a minor is someone under the age of 19!
Am
I missing something here? Additionally, this last statement means that a
14
year old is a legal adult; yet such adult can be dropped off at a safe
haven. I give up.


If you think about the amount of run aways each year, a safe haven is needed
for these older kids to go to other than the bus stops of the big cities.