Proposed Legislation

Introduction of The Bill of Rights for Children in Residential Treatment Facilities

 

1. Bill of Rights

2. Regulating Body Structure

3. Regulating Body Functions

4. Initial Independent Evaluations

5. Subsequent Evaluations

6. Visual Evidence

7. Legal Precedent for Intervention

 

 

1. Bill of Rights

• The Bill will regulate the contract between parents/guardians and programs, outlining basic human rights that must be observed by residential programs in the treatment of minors.

• By interceding during the contractual phase of commitment, this allows programs to operate day to day as private businesses without what could be deemed unreasonable government oversight.

• Only upon complaint will an investigation take place citing potential breach of contract relating to a violation of human rights.

• The Bill, being federally regulated and enforced, will provide children and parents with a clear path to file complaints through writing or by phone to the regulating body, with an additional requirement being that all children in residential treatment programs have daily access to an uncensored form of communication.

 

 

2. Regulating Body Structure

• A governing authority to ensure that programs are abiding by the Bill of Rights is necessary.

• This regulatory body can be an existing branch or group such as the recently authorized Federal Work Group (SICAA), or a new branch of an existing body such as Health and Human Services.

• The Bill of Rights can be passed federally and enforced in accordance with CPS (a state agency) since federal laws and regulations apply to its operations, though a separate branch would be recommended.

• The body can be a newly created bureau in the form of the proposed Federal Bureau of Child Treatment Facilities.

 

 

3. Regulating Body Functions

• The body will be tasked with maintaining oversight of all residential treatment programs that treat minors in the U.S. and its territories to ensure no human rights violations (as defined by the Bill) are occurring.

• The body will conduct or oversee random, federally authorized, comprehensive inspections (assessing and documenting living conditions, therapeutic practices, treatment plans, and freedom of communication), as well as quarterly or bi-yearly confidential interviews with both staff and residents.

• The body will make available a list of approved independent evaluators (psychological professionals) nationwide who will conduct interviews with children being considered for residential treatment.

• The body will regulate the transportation of children across state lines or where unaccompanied by family members, storing any surveillance footage and ensuring transport companies are appropriately licensed.

• Upon complaint, the body will act as a federal enforcement agency, conducting an initial independent investigation into the matter and either reporting the complaint to the appropriate law enforcement agency for further investigation or registering the case as an unsubstantiated complaint with no further pursuit.

• The body will inform parents of all complaints and work directly with them regarding open investigations.

• The body will have the federal authority to impose fines, suspend operations, or even close facilities if necessary, through a chain of reporting that will be developed upon establishment.

• The body will store youth surveillance footage in a private government database, only to be viewed if necessary in assisting an investigation or if requested by parents or guardians.

• The body will track and enforce compliance by programs regarding the submitting of signed forms.

• The body will be audited yearly by a third party to ensure standards are being met and to prevent corruption. 

 

 

4. Initial Independent Evaluations

• Independent evaluation will be required before children may be committed to residential treatment, due to the inherent conflict of interest for both parent/guardian and program.

• Evaluation will be conducted by a mental health professional with no financial ties to the program, who will assess whether residential treatment is necessary and whether the program being considered is appropriate given the child’s needs.

• Upon approval by the independent evaluator, forms including the Bill of Rights must be signed by all parties involved, and the child will be provided with a durable copy of the Bill to be retained on their person or in their private quarters.

 

 

5. Subsequent Evaluations

• The initial evaluator, unless mitigating circumstances require a change, will reassess the child every 30 to 60 days to track their psychological and emotional development in order to identify potentially harmful practices before they escalate and to look for signs of abuse, trauma, or regression. This must be conducted independently and by a mental health professional, as children may not appear in immediate danger (which is the measure of CPS intervention) but may still be at risk of severe long-term psychological harm. Since this is an industry built around psychological care, the measure of abuse must be psychological.

• Subsequent evaluations provide the evaluator a working knowledge of the child’s state of mind, allowing them to appropriately assess the methods used by programs. Thus, if multiple children in a program are showing similar symptoms of abuse or regression, further investigation of that program will be warranted.

• Evaluations will also help to show which programs and methods of treatment are most effective. In an industry with little to no studies around specific methodologies, this could work to legitimize those with proven records of positive outcomes and guide the development of future programs.

 

 

6. Visual Evidence

 

• It is recommended that all children in residential programs be provided, through the regulating body (and after initial evaluation) with a clip-on body camera that can be turned on or off at any point by the child to record any situation they deem unsafe or a violation of their rights. In programs where phones are permitted, cameras could also be activated through an app.

• All footage should be immediately uploaded and stored in a secure government database, and available only in the investigation of a potential violation or upon parental request.

• This footage allows parents or guardians direct access to visual evidence of the care their child is receiving to ensure it aligns with the structure they assumed when committing them, and protects programs against false accusations of abuse.

 

7. Legal Precedent for Intervention

 

• Treating residential treatment facilities as businesses, the vast number of complaints about manipulative marketing tactics, lack of transparency, purposeful misrepresentation, miseducation, and the covering up of human rights violations is, historically, sufficient grounds for the federal government to intervene and ensure appropriate oversight of the industry.

• The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act of 1938, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform & Consumer Protection Act all support federal intervention into private industry when consumers are being harmed by business practices. Using psychological damage as the measure of harm, intervention is overdue.

• Looking at constitutional law, there are numerous firsthand testimonies referencing violations of several amendments including the First, Eighth, Ninth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth being prevalent throughout the industry.​