SECTION 1.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(1) The United States Supreme Court has recognized a constitutional right to maintain parent-child relationships absent a compelling government interest, such as protecting a child from an unfit parent. (Santosky v. Kramer (1982) 455 U.S. 745, 753). The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has recognized that this constitutional right logically encompasses a right to maintain a relationship with a life partner. (United States v. Wolf Child (2012) 699 F.3d 1082, 1091).
(2) In 2009, the
Legislature passed Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 20 (Resolution Chapter 88 of the Statutes of 2009), which encouraged the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to use the bill of rights created by the San Francisco Children of Incarcerated Parents Partnership as a framework for analysis and determination of procedures when making decisions about services for the children of incarcerated parents.
(3) The bill of rights created by the San Francisco Children of Incarcerated Parents Partnership includes all of the following:
(A) A child has the right to speak with, see, and touch their parents. Actions to realize this right include, but are not limited to, providing access to visiting rooms that are child-centered, nonintimidating, and conducive to bonding, considering proximity to
family when locating prisons and assigning incarcerated persons, and encouraging child welfare departments to facilitate contact.
(B) A child has the right to support as that child faces a parent’s incarceration. Actions to realize this right include, but are not limited to, training adults who work with young people to recognize the needs and concerns of children whose parents are incarcerated, providing access to specially trained therapists, counselors, and mentors, and allocating 5 percent of the corrections-related budget to support the families of incarcerated persons.
(C) A child has a right to a lifelong relationship with their parent. Actions to realize this right include, but are not limited to, reexamining the federal Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, designating a
family services coordinator at prisons and jails, supporting incarcerated parents on reentry, and focusing on rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration.
(4) The principles announced in the bill of rights created by the San Francisco Children of Incarcerated Parents Partnership additionally apply to close family members and loved ones of incarcerated people, including individuals with family-like relationships who are often excluded under unduly narrow legal definitions of family members.
(5) In resolution A/RES/70/175 (December 2015), the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, known as the “Mandela Rules.” The Mandela Rules require that incarcerated persons be permitted to maintain regular communication
with family and friends by visits, telephone, electronic or digital communications, and mail (Rule 58). Further, the Mandela Rules provide that “disciplinary sanctions or restrictive measures shall not include the prohibition of family contact” (Rule 43).
(6) Article 16(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 23(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights establish the family as “the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”
(7) Family bonds extend through prison gates and must be protected during periods of incarceration by promoting in-person contact and regular communication between incarcerated persons and their families.
(8) From 1975 until 1997, Section 2601 of the Penal Code listed the right to “receive personal visits” among the civil rights retained by incarcerated persons.
(9) The American Bar Association established the Criminal Justice Standards on the Treatment of Prisoners (February 2010), which requires correctional authorities to provide incarcerated people with “conditions conducive to maintaining healthy relationships with their families” (Standard 23-1.2(a)(vi)).
(A) Standard 23-8.5(b) directs correctional authorities to implement visiting policies that support maintaining healthy family relationships by providing sufficient visiting space, convenient visiting times, and family friendly
family-friendly environments.
(B) Standard 23-8.5(c) directs that visitors not be unreasonably excluded on the basis of past criminal convictions.
(C) Standard 23-8.5(e) directs that contact visits be provided to persons incarcerated for more than 30 days absent an individual determination that a contact visit between a particular incarcerated person and a particular visitor poses a specified danger. Prison officials should develop other forms of communication, including video visits, “provided that such options are not a replacement for opportunities for in-person contact.”
(10) Family support and connections can help promote an incarcerated person’s reentry and reduce recidivism. Protecting and
promoting in-person family contact for an incarcerated person and their family can help to maintain those connections and that support.
(A) As early as January 1972, a study by the then-California Department of Corrections Research Division identified its “central finding” as “the discovery of a strong and consistently positive relationship between parole success and the maintenance of strong family ties while in prison. . . . evidence suggests that the inmate’s family should be viewed as the prime treatment agent and family contacts as a major correctional technique.” (Research Report No. 46, Explorations in Inmate-Family Relationships, in collaboration with the Research Division of the California Department of Corrections at 111–113).
(B) A review of 50 years of empirical
research by the Prison Policy Initiative (December 2021) found that researchers in multiple states consistently concluded that visitation, mail, phone, and other forms of contact between incarcerated people and their families have positive impacts for both the incarcerated person and their family—including better health, reduced recidivism, and improvement in children’s school performance. In particular, the review affirmed “In-person visitation is incredibly beneficial, reducing recidivism and improving health and behavior.”
(C) Research shows that visits and family programming reduce disciplinary infractions, increase the chances of successful parole, and decrease recidivism rates upon release and reentry into the community. Many incarcerated people rely on their families immediately after release to overcome reentry obstacles, including unemployment,
debt, and homelessness.
(11) Research confirms that incarceration imposes heavy burdens on the families of incarcerated people, including trauma for the children of incarcerated parents, as recognized on the adverse childhood experience index, in addition to the high costs of maintaining contact by telephone and visits. Consistent visits also have the potential for reducing the likelihood of intergenerational cycles of criminality and incarceration.
(12) Isolation from lack of visits and limited phone communications adversely affects the mental health of incarcerated people and contributes to mental suffering and conflict within prisons.
(13) The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these burdens for families and
adverse effects of isolation for incarcerated persons. From March 2020 to April 2021, in-person visits were canceled. In-person visits were severely restricted thereafter and were canceled intermittently due to periodic COVID-19 outbreaks. In September 2022, COVID-19 restrictions for in-person visits were lifted.
(b) Therefore, it is the intent of the Legislature to restore, strengthen, and protect the right of incarcerated persons to receive personal visits to support the emotional health of Californians and their incarcerated loved ones, to improve in-custody conduct, and to reduce recidivism.
(c) It is the Legislature’s further intent to strictly limit the circumstances under which in-person visitation between an incarcerated person and their family can be denied, restricted, terminated,
or suspended.