House Judiciary, 4/20/26, 1pm

This meeting of the House Judiciary Committee will now come to order. The time is now 2:00 PM on Monday, April 20th, 2026. We are meeting in the Grunberg Room, Capitol Room 120. The following members are present: Representative Eichide, Representative Vance, Vice Chair Kopp, and myself, Representative Gray, Chair. Let the record reflect that we have a quorum to conduct business.

I would like to recognize the staff supporting this meeting: Sophia Tenney from House Records, Kyla Tupou from the Juneau LIO, and my committee aide, Dylan Hitchcock Lopez. We have one item of business on today's agenda, Senate Bill 9, Surrender of Infants, Infant Safety Device, by Senator Myers.

Our item of business is Senate Bill 9, uh, Surrender of Infants, Infant Safety Device. I would ask that, uh, the sponsor, Senator Myers, and his staff, Teresa Waldstad, come to the witness table, put yourselves on the record, and provide a brief reminder about this bill. All right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, Robert Myers, Senator for District Q up in the Fairbanks-North Pole area. I know we've been over to various versions of this bill before, and I believe we do have a committee substitute to introduce today, so I didn't want to spend too much time on the details of it, but just want to go over the usual background of the bill. So in 2008, Alaska passed the Safe Surrender Law that allows a parent in crisis to surrender a newborn up to 21 days to a doctor, nurse, peace officer, firefighter, or other person who can reasonably care for the child.

Since that bill was passed, 9 infants have been safely surrendered. Despite this law, 3 infants have been found abandoned in the state since 2013—2 in Anchorage and 1 in Fairbanks. And while the Fairbanks infant survived, both infants in Anchorage tragically perished before being found. In the most recent incident in 2024, the infant was found just a block away from an Anchorage fire station. And while we don't know every individual's motivation, anecdotal evidence indicates that shame and fear are still barriers to safely surrendering an infant directly to a person.

SB 9 provides a solution to these problems. Following 22 other states, it creates a legal framework for infant safety devices to be installed at hospitals, fire stations, police stations, or other health facilities owned or managed, uh, by a tribal health organization. These safety devices are climate controlled, have an automatic lock, are required to be installed in a conspicuous place with appropriate signage, have 24-hour video surveillance, and immediately trigger a call to the 911 system to dispatch emergency services when the device is opened contain an automatic lock to secure the infant after use. Mr. Chair, I do want to quickly note what this bill does not do.

It does not mandate installation of these devices. The facilities in question would have to agree to install and then provide monthly inspections of the device. The bill does not pay for these devices. I was approached to sponsor this bill at roughly the same time by both a group in Fairbanks who offered to pay for a device to be installed in the Fairbanks Memorial Hospital, and by the Anchorage Fire Department who wishes to install a device at one of their stations as a result of the most recent incident in Anchorage. Without this bill, both groups are unable to do so because state law currently limits safe surrender to a person directly.

SB 9 remedies that problem. Mr. Chair, this is a tool in the toolbox to help us save lives. With the problem of infants still being abandoned on the side of the road still happening, we hope that adding this tool can help address the problem. Um, with your indulgence, Mr.

Chair, I also have a letter, uh, that I was sent a couple weeks ago from the person who has adopted the baby in that was abandoned in Fairbanks that I'd like to read. Thank you. This is from Mallory Haynes. Dear Senator Myers, I want to take a moment to personally thank you for the work you did and are doing to get Senate Bill 9 passed. This is and has been a topic very near and dear to my heart.

On New Year's Eve 2021, a newborn was left in a cardboard box on the side of the road right here in Fairbanks. I'm sure you remember the story. We had just gotten an unprecedented weather event. And if I remember correctly, a state of emergency was declared and an extra 200 man-hours worth of snow removal had been put into place. Plows were everywhere, working hard to clear the ice and snow.

The danger he was in is heartbreaking. A Good Samaritan found him, called the authorities, and got him to safety. 3 Days later, my phone rang. My husband and I are foster parents. We went to the hospital and brought that precious baby home with us.

The Good Samaritan who found him posted his picture on social media. His photo and story went viral. He was the talk of the town for weeks. I essentially went into hiding with him to ensure no one recognized him during errands or just living life. It was several months before I took him into public, and even then I kept him hidden from view.

In the following days, troopers discovered the identity of the mother. She was a terrified little girl going through the worst nightmare of her life. We actually ended up fostering her a couple of years later. To this day, she still calls me Mom, and we have a strong relationship with her. 840 Days after being abandoned, our family was blessed to officially give him our last name.

We were able to adopt him on April 9th, 2020— excuse me, April 19th, 2024. Had Fairbanks had baby boxes, I don't know if the mother would have been able to access one or if she would have chosen to use one, but at least now we're one step closer to them being an option. We are one of the coldest cities in the world, and if they're needed anywhere, it's here. I will always be the mom on the other end of the line if and when these boxes are utilized. I will keep these babies safe, warm, and protected.

I can't imagine the heartbreak of a birth family needing to utilize this option, but as for me and my family, we will always be here to quietly support them in their time of need. That baby boy is now 4 years old. He's all boy and full of life. He has the best sense of humor. He adores his big sisters and fiercely loves and protects all the foster babies who have come through our home.

He loves Spider-Man and his teddy bear Douglas. He is generous with his snuggles and loves to do everything all by himself. We cannot imagine our lives without him. Thank you for your work to get this bill passed. If there's anything I can do to help this bill further, don't hesitate to reach out.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'm hoping that when we come to public testimony, um, that, uh, Ms. Haynes will be, uh, available to testify as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Senator Myers. Um, let the record reflect that we were joined by Representative Underwood at 2:01 PM, Representative Costello at 2:02 PM, and Representative Mena at 2:05 PM. Uh, today it is my intent to adopt a committee substitute for Senate Bill 9. Uh, do we have a motion?

Yes. Yes, Mr. Chair. I move that Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 9, Work Order 34-LS0085/Q be adopted as the Committee's working document. I object for the purposes of discussion.

I would now like to call on my committee aide, Dylan Hitchcock Lopez, to come forward, put himself on the record, and walk us through the changes in the Committee Substitute.

Good afternoon. Dylan Hitchcock Lopez, committee aide. There's a new title, and then Sections 1 and 2 are new from the previous version. This edition was born out of sort of the discovery of an anomaly in working on this bill, that a parent who surrenders a child and, you know, follows all the requirements of the Safe Surrender Law is immune from criminal prosecution. However, that parent is actually not immune from civil consequences, and particularly in the licensing and certification arena.

So termination of parental rights under Title 47 is a barrier crime for certain kinds of licensure and certification. The intent of this is to remove that barrier, to say that, you know, as a matter of law, if you do what you're supposed to do, if you're in this situation, if you avail yourselves of Alaska's Safe Surrender Law, that truly is a safe surrender, and that cannot be held against you at a later point down the road in your life. So this just makes two changes in statute. To ensure that parents who do surrender their child in full compliance with safe surrender law don't suffer those professional licensing and certification consequences during civil history and background checks. Sections 3 and 5 are— there's no substantive changes there.

There's some minor conforming and numbering changes to account for a new, uh, a change in terminology, which is in Section 6, which I'll discuss next.

Section 6 is substantially similar to the previous version. There's sort of two portions of the section that have changed. One is a tweak to the signage requirements. So there's an infant safety device must be accompanied by signage that states that the device is only for children under 21 days of age, which is consistent with the requirements of the law. Two, that the parent may also surrender the infant in person to an employee of the of the facility, and 3, that a parent may call 911 and to surrender directly to emergency services.

These changes were born out of conversations that we've had in the companion legislation that I think it became clear to the committee that in fact many, many folks actually don't know what their options are around safe surrender. So this is supposed to be neutrally worded signage that just makes sure that a person using one of these boxes is aware of the full options under the law so they can make their own choice about which is best for them. And then the final change is in Section 6 is to substitute the term "authorized facility" for "designated facility." That decision was made in consultation with the Department, who had expressed some concerns that the term "designated facility" is a defined term with a specific legal meaning in other statutes. And though this was defined for purposes of this chapter, that could cause some confusion to folks who maybe aren't aren't tracking. So by using the term authorized facility, which is defined in this section, it's just clear that there's no confusion.

And then Section 7, which is the effective date, there's no substantive change there.

Are there any questions about the committee substitute? Representative Mena. Thank you, Chair Gray. Through the Chair, on Section 6, I like a lot of the changes and updates for this signage. I'm a little confused about the provision that the signage would include a statement that the, uh, infant safety device is only for a child less than 21 days old.

And I know that the Safe Surrender Law applies to a child less than 21 days old, but the device itself— what would happen if a child who is 25 days were placed into the box? I think the purpose of this signage requirement is that if someone perhaps is not aware of that the law requires the child to be less than 21 years of— days of age, not years, they would certainly be under 21 years of age, the child, if they're not aware of that, they could potentially be violating the Safe Surrender Law and be criminally liable if they were to put a child, say, 25 days or older. So the purpose of this is just to make sure that there's a clear disclaimer about the legal requirements, age requirement, And that was the purpose of that, uh, of that amendment. Just a follow-up, or perhaps a comment through the chair. I think it would be helpful that language would be specific to the Safe Surrender Law itself.

I think just saying that a child less than 21 days cannot be placed into the device doesn't get to that goal of more education for the Safe Surrender Law. But I support most of the changes in the CS.

Representative Costello. Thank you. And my questions have to do with that same section. Um, so where, so where did the 21 days come from? I imagine it's probably other states have had that deadline.

And, um, you know, really, how do you enforce it? Um, if a child, if, if an infant is left in the box and it's 25 days old, how would you even I don't know, I guess I would like a little more context to why, why the 21 days. Mr. Hitchcock Lopez, uh, thank you. Through the chair to Representative Costello, uh, Don Hitchcock Lopez. So I think that the 21 days is a creature of existing statute, which is why it was chosen here.

I mean, and so we could, um, I, I don't have the answer off the top of my head. I mean, we, we would need to look back, I think, at what the, uh, this body thought when it first enacted that. And I think that perhaps the department, I know they're going to be available for, for questions later on today, that might be a good question for the department because I do think that there are situations where, you know, given that it's not always— these laws apply to, you know, sometimes anonymous surrender, but also to surrender that isn't truly anonymous. And there, you know, there are consequences for surrendering a child, but with where you— where, say, the child actually has been harmed, right? And there will be an investigation.

There can be subsequent criminal or civil penalties associated with that if in the process of surrender some aspect of safe surrender law is violated. The department will probably be able to speak to, okay, what— how do those investigations look and what happens in those situations? And so I think that, you know, that's— I would say that though it is difficult and in some situations not enforced, I do think there— and this obviously has— I think we've heard from the sponsor that maybe 9 surrenders have taken place since the law was enacted. So it's not a huge sample size. But I think that there are situations in which there are investigations and they are enforced.

Again, I would defer though to the, to the specialists in that matter. I'll just make the comment that a 25-day-old infant would be accepted as a 21-day-old infant. Like, that's not going to lead to an investigation. But a 1-year-old is obviously above 21 days. So I think the point is, is that they're saying this is the law.

If somebody puts a 25-day infant in there, they slipped by, you know, like they violated the law, but nothing's going to happen. There's going to be no investigation. But obviously, if you put a toddler in there, then there will be an investigation. So I think just stating that the law says 21 days or younger is letting the person know what the law is. And I think that— so, so I guess like I don't want to get hung up on how they're going to know if it's 21 days.

I think it's like if it's obviously a baby that's older than 3 weeks old, then I think there would be an investigation. And the reason we chose 21 days is because that's the law of the state of Alaska.

Any other questions about the committee substitute?

I remove my objection.

Hearing no objections, Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 9 has been adopted as— and that's Work Order 34-LS0085/Q— has been adopted as the Committee's working document.

Oh, yes. I'm so sorry. We should have asked you first. Senator Myers, can you come up and give your opinion on the committee substitute?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. For the record, Robert Myers again. Yes. No, I appreciate the last couple of weeks working with yourself, Mr.

Chair, and your committee aide in drafting this substitute. I believe that this addresses the concerns that we had. Um, did appreciate, uh, your suggestions on the signage as well, and also appreciate the suggestions from the department, uh, as far as the, uh, the, the civil history, uh, lookbacks. Hadn't been aware that that was an issue, so I'm happy that they brought that before us. Um, last thing I want to do is punish somebody for doing the right thing, so I'm very happy to— with, uh, with the way that this committee substitute worked out.

And I believe we've got some invited testimony as well when we have time for that. Thank you. At this time, we will take up invited testimony. I'm going to ask that we hold questions until hearing from all of our testifiers. Our first testifier is Douglas Schwage, Fire Chief for the Anchorage Fire Department.

Chief Schwage, if you would please take yourself off mute, put yourself on the record, and begin your testimony.

Yes, uh, good afternoon, uh, members of committee and Chair Gray. Can you hear me okay? We can hear you great. Please continue. Thank you.

I'm Doug Schragi. I'm the fire chief in Anchorage. I'm here to speak in support of Senate Bill 9. I think that Senator Myers did a very good job of capturing the purpose and the intent of this bill. I would like to add that nothing precludes a fire department today from installing one of these safe haven baby boxes or a similar device.

If one had been installed, nothing would preclude somebody looking to surrender their infant from doing so. The problem that we're trying to solve is that in actuality, people have been abandoning babies, uh, in a couple of cases in close proximity to a fire station. I happen to have been working in Fairbanks as the fire chief up at UAF when the story that Senator Myers relayed with a very happy ending occurred, and that was very close to my home. And I was also working here in Anchorage as the fire chief when, in just a couple of years ago, we had a very similar situation where a child was left abandoned on a cold street, and the outcome was not not good. The problem that we're trying to solve is, uh, that the, the current problem of immunity may be a deterrent, and it may be that people are fearful of the face-to-face interaction that, that is currently required as a condition for that immunity.

Today, somebody could ring the doorbell at any one of our fire stations, or a fire station in Fairbanks or Ketchikan, or any other community and under Alaska's Safe Haven Law be able to surrender the, the child without fear of prosecution. However, something is causing people not to want to do that, and we think that even if one of these abandoned infants was.

Was surrendered to one of these climate-controlled, secure, monitored, safe devices that have been proven in other states, that it would be well worth the effort that we're taking today. Alaska Statute 47.10.013 requires a warm handoff to a live person in a fire station or to a police officer or to a certain healthcare professional. And the statute doesn't currently contemplate the availability of these, these safe surrender vaults. And so Senate Bill 9, I think, attempts to resolve that. And it's for that reason that I and others are in strong support of this bill.

And I'd appreciate your consideration. I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you, Chief Stragi. We're going to hold questions till the end of our invited testimony. Our next testifier is Julie Condell, lead 911 dispatcher for the Anchorage Fire Department.

Ms. Condell, would you please take yourself off mute, put yourself on the record, and begin your testimony?

Hi, good evening. This is— my name is Julie Condell, and I want to thank Chair Gray and Chair Coffey, members of the committee today, for listening to us. I am a lead dispatcher for the Anchorage Fire Department. I've been a member of Anchorage Fire Department going on 20 years, and 11 of those has been a lead dispatcher. I started this process because my fellow dispatcher and friend, Frances, brought up the fact of a really hard call that she took in 2013.

We already deal with a lot of trauma in our jobs as is, but having the type of trauma where a baby is left abandoned and succumbs to that situation, it just makes our job more difficult. And it makes it— it's not only trauma on us, it's trauma on responders, it's trauma on the people that find these babies. So after she had started seeing information about the ability to surrender a child in a baby box. This became more of a hot topic, and we decided to start working on this the last few years. As Chief Schrag talked about, you know, we have the situation in Fairbanks, and it's nice that that had a great ending.

And I really appreciate everything that Senator Myers had to say in reading that letter. But unfortunately, a lot of these situations don't have happy endings. They have traumatic ones, and it has a domino effect of consequences on the individuals that are here to try to preserve life from the jobs that we do. As we've already talked about, in November of 2024, a block away from our downtown fire station, someone abandoned a child that also would have— through this process of being able to have the ability to have that throughout the country. 24 Different states now have these installed, and it's been recovered from these.

The thing of the matter is, is we still have the SAFE, you know, Surrender Act in place. We still have the ability to go to a police officer, to go to a firefighter, you know, to hospital staff, and surrender a child. However, not everyone has the necessary ability to do that, and whatever that reasoning is, unless we ever talk to those people or someone comes forward and tells their story, we're never going to know why that is. People can make assumptions all all day long of what's going on, but having another element in place where someone can anonymously surrender a child and then we're notified. These boxes, how they work is as soon as you open the door, an alarm goes off that the door has been opened.

As soon as a child's placed in it, there's alarms that go off to show that a child's been placed in it. Once the door is closed, it's a climate-controlled box, and more alarms go off. Calls are made to 911 to show that we have a baby surrendered in the box. There's options to have cameras just placed showing the bassinet area where the baby would be so we could see that there's a child inside the box. I think all of these things are so pertinent to what we do that we're able to make legislation that possibly saves a life.

And at the end of the day, for me, all the other issues on, on the table become secondary because we have all these other areas in place and we should educate people about the different options. But at the end of the day, we're still finding babies left in the woods, babies left in dumpsters, babies left on train tracks. I mean, that is kind of a trauma that you're not going to get over. It's something that's going to stay with you. It stayed with Frances since 2013, and it will continue to stay with responders.

It will continue to stay if you just happen to be walking down the street and find a baby on the side of the road. It's something that I'm hoping that we can prevent, and I appreciate everyone here today. In support of this bill. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer when we're done. Ms. Condell, I apologize for mispronouncing your name.

Thank you for your testimony. We will now move to our final testifier, Frances Robinson, 911 telecommunicator for the Anchorage Fire Department. Ms. Robinson, please put yourself on the record and begin your testimony.

Good afternoon, Chair Gray, Chair Cobb, and members of the committee. My name is Frances Robinson. I have been a dispatcher for the Anchorage Fire Department for 19 years. I want to thank you for hearing this bill today, and thank you to Senator Myers for bringing this bill forward. I appreciate being able to go on record in my support of SB 9.

Despite the current Safe Haven law, Anchorage has had 2 abandoned infant deaths. In October 2013, I answered a 911 call for a baby that had been abandoned in a public park and found deceased by a gentleman walking his dog. He had heard the baby crying the night before but had been unable to locate the baby until the following morning. In November 2024, a deceased newborn with the umbilical cord still attached was found outside just one block from our downtown fire station where the baby could have been safely surrendered. In December 2021, a newborn was abandoned in a cardboard box in Fairbanks at 12 below.

These real-life illegal abandonments show us that mothers are seeking to keep their identity secret. Although the current Safe Haven law allows for confidentiality, confidentiality is not anonymity. SB 9 allows for the safe surrender of an infant 21 days or less in an infant safety device without fear of being recognized, the stigma associated with the surrender, or the fear of prosecution due to lack of knowledge and misunderstanding of the Safe Haven law. We have had an outpouring from the community of people who not only want infant safety devices available but are also offering financial support. We are eager and ready to move forward with bringing infant safety devices to our community upon passing of legislation allowing for safe surrender in an infant safety device.

The goal is to save lives, which I believe we can accomplish by passing SB 9. This concludes my testimony, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Miss Robinson, for your testimony. I will now open it up for questions from the committee to our invited testimony. And also we have Robert Nave, Division's Operation Manager, Division of Healthcare Services, Department of Health, and Tandra Donahue, Social Services Program Administrator, Office of Children's Services, Department of Family and Community Services.

And in the room we have Kristi Vogeli, who is the liaison for the Department of Family and Community Services. So, um, questions from committee?

Representative Mena. Thank you, Chair Gray. Through the chair, now that the— this bill version has language on awareness on calling 911 to safely surrender a baby. How often, or has there ever been calls for people calling 911 to do a safe surrender?

Uh, Miss Kondell.

So we, we had had this question filled into us just recently about people calling 911 to surrender surrender children. We haven't, at least in my career, we haven't had 911 calls where people are calling to surrender their kids. I mean, we've had a lot of bad situations involving children, like being on the side of the street and being passed around inside and outside of a jacket where a child's in danger. During that process of going through this, we've talked to several chiefs where they said that they know of two different fire stations where a child has been safely dropped off using the Safe Surrender Act. But if anyone ever called 911 and said that they couldn't take care of their child and that they wanted to have emergency personnel come and pick them up, I'm confident that we would step in and we would load a call.

I know as a supervisor I'd load a call and we would go to that location. We also have a mobile crisis team that would, you know, be deployed simultaneously, I would assume, in order to provide support for the family and figure out what's going on so the child is in safe hands. Thank you. Other questions? Representative Vance.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just think it's important to put it on the record for the public listening. If, if there's a mother who wants to surrender their child who's over 21 days, what's the process for that that would offer that child support? Because obviously they would be making a concerted effort. We know that there are mothers who say I'm just not able to take care of this child for whatever reason, and I'd like to put it on the record for the public of what their options are to show that we really do— they do have options available, um, just to make it clear that there isn't a cutoff of, of 21 days.

They still have options to get the support that they need. So if there's someone who could identify that. Thank you. Addie's.

Back on the record. We're going to go to Tandra Donahue to answer the question of ways that a parent can safely surrender a baby that's over the age of 21 days?

Thank you. For the record, this is Tandra Donahue, Program Administrator with the Office of Children's Services. Thank you for the question, Representative. There's several ways that the public can seek alternative methods if they want to safely you know, surrender or with the understanding that they're unable to take care of their own child, that would not require the 21-day threshold. We have adoption agencies available in Alaska that assist a lot of families that are private adoption options.

Our tribes, if they are a tribal member, that they can do cultural or tribal adoptions that would not involve the involvement of OCS. In particular, in areas where we don't have any indications of, you know, maltreatment or abuse or neglect. So there are different agencies out there that folks have been able to use without the assistance of OCS or other measures that could be pursued.

Thank you. Follow-up? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted that for the record because I don't want people to feel that they don't have options, but I certainly appreciate the work done on this bill because it's like the sponsor said, it's a tool in the toolbox that hopefully will help save lives. Thank you.

And I'll just say for the record that I too share the curiosity of Representative Costello of how the legislature in 2008 decided upon 21 days as the cutoff. And so my staff will be finding the minutes those meetings, and we will be uploading them to BASIS for folks who are interested in why 21 days was the cutoff for safe surrender. Any other questions from committee?

Representative Mena. Thank you, Chair Gray. Through the chair, this might be just a comment or suggestion for the bill sponsor. So I know we had received a letter from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and part of their concern with the bill is just related to the parent and the time of the immediate postpartum care for that parent. And I'm still interested in some sort of— I think the, the calling 911 language is a good start with the signage, but also language that would help the, the mother in this situation and making sure that they get the right care that they need.

So I'm happy to work with you on what that language could be.

Senator Myers. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through the chair, Representative Mena. So, um, I, I appreciate the intent of, of what you're trying to accomplish there.

Um, I, I, I too agree that we should be able to get— we, we should try to get people the medical care they need whenever possible. Um, but effectively, in the situations that we're discussing here, we're talking about a situation where A young mother, well, usually young, probably doesn't want to talk to somebody, is the difficult situation. And if we're talking about a public education campaign or something like that, I could generally get on board with that. If we're talking about something much further than that, I think we're talking about some other things that the chair had brought up regarding the House Companion version of this legislation, which, while admirable in intent, are extremely much, much larger policy calls than what we're trying to deal with here. So I try to defer those to other types of legislation.

So, again, while I appreciate the intent, I do want to, you know, not necessarily bog this down and stop this by trying to tack on an additional issue or an additional concern.

Thank you. Representative Mina. Thank you. Through the chair, just a follow-up. I guess part of my worry with my evolving thoughts on this legislation and this policy is that I don't think that the child should be treated in a vacuum that is separate from the person who has birthed that child.

And I think it's really important to consider that there's two humans who are in this incredibly vulnerable situation. And I— I think in these stances that you're correct that the person doesn't want to talk to anybody, but I also don't think that we should neglect a missed opportunity to even provide some more information for that person. We already have language on 911. Why not have additional language that says, uh, here are resources, uh, for if you have just been given birth, and this, uh, letter from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists talks about this immediate postpartum period as being a time of heightened medical risk and serious complications. And so if we're putting a lot of work in making sure that we save the life of, of the baby, I want to make sure that we're also not neglecting the life of the mother.

Uh, through the chair, Representative Mena, uh, I, I appreciate your, your concern there. You know, as of right now, current law says that anybody can walk into an emergency room and receive treatment as necessary. So if the issue there is somebody doesn't want to be shown with the child that they've just birthed, can they drop the child off in the safety device and then go to the ER? That's entirely possible already. If they don't want to show any evidence whatsoever that they've been pregnant and given birth, then I think we're a little beyond that.

Unfortunately, there's not much that we can do to encourage somebody to go to a doctor who doesn't want to go to a doctor. My wife encourages me to go to the doctor and I often don't. So I'm on the other side of that too.

So I am, I guess what we are bumping up against here is a couple of different things. One is what is availability and known, and what is— and known about what, and the other is what is human nature and what people are actually willing to do. And on the former, we can make some headway. On the latter, probably not very much. It is just my concern.

Follow-up. Follow-up. Thank you, Chair Gray. Through the chair, for me, as I think about what's the opportunity for us to provide that education while also respecting the independence and the liberty of the mother to make the decision that she feels is best for her, you know, I think about the alcohol signage law that was passed a few years ago that just provides a little bit of education that alcohol could cause risks to cancer, etc. And if we're already putting language that's about raising awareness about 911 in safe surrender, my curiosity is why not add just a little bit more language about other resources for, uh, the mother just in terms of her own health?

Through the chair, Representative Mena, I, I think I'd be happy to follow up with the conversation with you outside the committee meeting about a little couple, a couple of different things along those lines that we've run into with our research over the last couple years. Thank you. I see Ms. Kondell's hand is raised. Before we go to Ms. Kondell, I just wanted to make the comment that this bill has not occurred in vacuum, and I'm grateful to Representative Ruffridge for adding intent language to the operating budget that the Department of Health will advertise in some way, shape, or form to the public that 911 is an option for safe surrender of an infant. As we learned on this committee, we were not aware that you could call 911 to safely surrender your infant.

And the, the big advantage I see is that a new mother doesn't have to find a box. The, you know, the EMT can come to her. Ms. Condell.

Yeah, I just wanted to add to the concern about the mother's side. Like has been stated by Senator Myers so eloquently, as you know, this bill is about protecting the life of an infant that the parent no longer wants. One of the good things about the infant safety devices is there's resource bags that are placed within the device, so when.

Mother relinquishes her baby, there's also material that she can take about getting care for herself as well. And I think that helps provide that educational opportunity for the mother to take the paperwork and hopefully follow up as needed for her own health and safety as well.

Thank you. Representative Vance. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to note that The Department of Health does have a website that talks about the safe surrender of infants, and they have posters that people can print out that talk about where they say, "Help us spread the word," that people in the community can put out there. And then they have also have a PSA video campaign called Every Child Deserves a Safe Start.

So I think this is one of those things that It's going to take community members talking about what's available and also reminding, you know, these young women that, that they can go into an emergency room and without condemnation, and they're going to get the help that they need for what's happening with them. But also they have options if they feel that they're unable to take care of their baby, and this is one of them. So having these partners be able to help get the word out is key to it because most people probably didn't even know that we had safe surrender at all. And I think that's very, very important. So, um, just knowing that that's available on the website, they're doing that.

Um, I would encourage that the department to continue on social media. That's where a lot of people are. They see social media more than posters and, and maybe just the awareness that they have options ahead of them, uh, especially in the variety of ways that was put on the record. It's not just OCS because a lot of people may not want to surrender to that department, but they have options through tribes and adoption as well as the baby boxes. But the baby boxes, I hope that every, every department, every community who installs them will let people know, hey, this is available, because we just, we just don't know.

We don't know who is going to feel that they're in a desperate situation. And I think it's key that, that more partners have, have the awareness available to them. Thank you, Representative Vance. And I will just add that social media alone is inadequate, and there are many folks who log on to Facebook every day and have never seen anything from the Department of Health. And so I would recommend radio, TV, direct mail.

There are many different ways of reaching the public, and we should be doing a variety of ways. Representative Costello and then Representative Mena. Thank you. I just want to thank the sponsor for the bill. Um, I think it sends a message that an unwanted pregnancy is not an unwanted child.

So I was adopted through Catholic Social Services, and so anyway, I really again appreciate this bill. I think it's a long time in the coming. Representative Mena, uh, through the chair, uh, thank you, Representative Vance, for just highlighting that webpage, and I was looking at it on the Safe Surrender Law. So it's on the Department of Family Community Services website, and I'm curious— this question is for Ms. Vogely— after the department split into Department of Health and Family Community Services, does DFCS work with DOH on incorporating any postpartum maternal care into how they educate about the Safe Surrender Law? And maybe that could be an area that we could help improve this issue holistically.

Hello, for the record, my name is Chrissy Vogely. I'm the Senior Policy Advisor for the Department of Family and Community Services. So we are— we do have the website regarding the Safe Surrender Law, and within the Department of Health, within their Division of Public Health, they do have a unit for for Women, Children, and Families, and that unit does look into the public health surrounding, you know, postpartum care and things like that. I would potentially have to defer to Ms. Donahue to see if she knows how much collaboration goes on. There is collaboration for sure between the Office of Children's Services and the Division of Public Health on these issues.

However, that specific area, I'm not sure how much is going on at this moment. Ms. Donahue.

Hi, this is Tandra Donahue again, for the record, with the Office of Children's Services. Through the chair representative, we do partner closely with the Department of Health with their infant and maternal unit, but in particular to safe surrender cases, I think because there's been such few numbers of them, it's kind of been on an individual case in terms of, you know, the identification of if we know who the mother is, other family members. We do provide support and services like we do with any family. Within OCS, obviously, they could either accept any type of referral. We may offer or refuse any type of case planning or services from OCS.

But we do have ongoing collaboration for the health, for maternal and child, particularly around the safety of them, with the Department of Health.

Thank you. Representative Mina. Thank you, Chair Gray. Through the chair, and just a quick follow-up for the committee afterwards, I would love more information from either DFCS and/or DOH on what that collaboration is between Safe Surrender and, um, the, the infant and mortality unit. Thank you, um, Representative Mina.

I don't know, um, does Robert Nave, Division Office Operations Manager for the Division of Healthcare Services, have a comment.

I just figured since we did have someone from Department of Health and we were talking about collaboration that I could call on Department of Health.

To the Chair, for the record, Robert Nave, Division Operations Manager, Division of Healthcare Services. On this particular issue, and the Division of Public Health, Question, it wouldn't fall under the Division of Healthcare Services. Thank you.

Any other questions from committee?

Seeing no more questions from the committee, I would note for the record that this committee has heard extensive public testimony on this subject matter and considering the bill's companion legislation in the House. Given the amount of attention devoted to the topic, I would ask if it is the will of the committee to submit amendments on SB 9.

Seeing that there are amendments to be submitted, we will set an amendment deadline for Thursday, April 23rd, 2026 at 5 PM. Please work with my committee aide to ensure that all of your amendments are submitted on time. We will now set SB 9 aside and bring it back up at a later date. Um, that concludes today's business before the committee. Before we adjourn, here is a preview of our upcoming meetings.

Wednesday, April 22nd, SB 167, Criminal Convictions Overturned, Received Past PFD, by Senator Kawasaki. HB 318, Social Media Minors, Representative Elam. And on Friday, April 24th, 2026, HB 367, Consumer Data Privacy Act, by Representative Story. The time is now 2:45 PM, and this hearing of the House Judiciary Committee is adjourned.