Bill Description: House Bill 682 would add conditions under which a court may terminate parental rights.
Rating: -1
Does it violate the spirit or the letter of either the United States Constitution or the Idaho Constitution? Examples include restrictions on speech, public assembly, the press, privacy, private property, or firearms. Conversely, does it restore or uphold the protections guaranteed in the US Constitution or the Idaho Constitution?
Section 16-2005, Idaho Code, allows a court to grant an order terminating parental rights “where it finds that termination of parental rights is in the best interests of the child” and one or more conditions specified in statute exist.
Among the conditions contained in this statute is “sexual abuse against a child of the parent,” and a list of relevant statutes defining the term "sexual abuse.”
House Bill 682 would add to the list of conditions under which parental rights could be terminated “or a conviction of sexual abuse against any child” and keep the same list of statutes to define “sexual abuse.”
Included in this list is Section 18-1508A, Idaho Code, which criminalizes sexual contact (or the solicitation of sexual contact) with someone age 16 or 17. Sometimes informally referred to as “statutory rape,” this section does not apply to forced or coerced contact.
It is important to note here that the statute dealing with terminating parental rights (in subsection (2)(a)) addresses cases in which the child in question is conceived through rape or other sexual crimes, but it only applies in cases where the mother is under the age of 16.
But a child conceived by a father and a 17-year-old mother whose relationship fell outside of the 5-year age difference in §18-1508A or the 3-year age difference in §18-6101, could result in the father’s parental rights being terminated under the scope of the change proposed in this bill.
Additionally concerning is the lack of any timeline or time limits on the application of this law. If a 22-year-old had sexual contact with a 16- or 17-year-old, dealt with the consequences, and a decade later got married and had a child, he would still fall under the provisions of this statute if he had been convicted of a violation of §18-1508A or §18-6101. Should his marriage end in divorce at some point, his ex-wife could seek the termination of his parental rights based on this long-past offense.
It is also worth noting here that a parent who is incarcerated and “likely to remain incarcerated for a substantial period of time during the child's minority” is another condition under which parental rights may be terminated, so a serious and recent crime is already accounted for under this law.
Terminating parental rights is a serious government intrusion that should be reserved for extreme cases in which it is necessary to protect the child from harm. This bill overshoots that mark and would potentially allow for parental rights to be terminated unnecessarily.
(-1)
