WeVote

Bill

Bill

HB 3365

JUV CT-DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

104th Regular Session Introduced by Murri Briel and 11 co-sponsors

Establishes a rebuttable presumption that minor children stay with a parent/guardian who is a domestic-violence victim, unless independent abuse/neglect is found.

0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 3365

Summary — HB 3365 (JUV CT‑DOMESTIC VIOLENCE) — 2025

Status: Introduced Feb 26, 2025; Passed House (3rd Reading 4/10/2025, 73–38); arrived in Senate 4/14/2025; placed on General State Calendar (5/14/2025). Primary sponsors: Reps. Dave Vella and Lakesia Collins. Multiple co‑sponsors and later added Senate alternate co‑sponsors (Sen. Lakesia Collins as chief Senate sponsor; Sen. Mike Simmons added 7/24/2025).

Purpose
- Revise definitions and standards in two child‑welfare statutes to (1) clarify when a child is “abused” or “neglected,” (2) incorporate protections for young adults living in licensed child‑care facilities, and (3) create a statutory presumption favoring custody retention for parents/guardians who are victims of domestic violence unless independent acts/omissions justify removal.

Key provisions and changes
1. Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act (325 ILCS 5/3)
- Adds/clarifies definitions:
- “Adult resident”: persons 18–22 residing in facilities licensed under the Child Care Act of 1969; such residents may be treated under the Act’s abused/neglected criteria.
- “Agency”: explicitly includes licensed child‑care facilities and transitional living programs taking placements of children and adult residents in DCFS guardianship.
- “Blatant disregard”: defines a higher‑threshold failure to protect a child (or adult resident) — including failure of staff to perform duties or agency failure to implement protective practices — where risk of serious harm would be obvious to a reasonable caretaker.
- Retains existing enumerated categories of “abused child” (physical injury, sexual offenses, torture, excessive corporal punishment, controlled substances distribution, trafficking, grooming, etc.).
- Refines “neglected child” definition to emphasize environments creating a “real, significant and imminent likelihood” of harm and links such harm to a parent/caretaker’s blatant disregard.

  1. Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (705 ILCS 405; Sections amended: 1‑3, 2‑3, 2‑10, 2‑18, 2‑21, 2‑27)
    • Adds/clarifies definitions and best‑interest factors (age‑ and developmentally‑sensitive list).
    • Defines “domestic violence” by reference to the Illinois Domestic Violence Act (including Criminal Code violation 12‑4.4a).
    • Establishes a rebuttable presumption: it is consistent with the health, safety, and best interests of a minor to remain in custody of a parent/guardian who experienced domestic violence, unless the court finds the parent/guardian who experienced domestic violence committed separate acts or omissions (unrelated to being a victim) that independently support an abuse/neglect determination.

Who is affected
- Children and youth involved with DCFS and juvenile courts.
- “Adult residents” aged 18–22 in licensed child‑care/transitional living facilities.
- Parents, guardians, and caretakers — particularly victims of domestic violence.
- Child‑welfare agencies, licensed facilities, residential program staff, mandated reporters, and juvenile court judges and attorneys.

Procedural / timeline notes
- House passed bill with Floor Amendment No. 1 (adopted 4/10/2025).
- Referred to Senate Assignments upon arrival; placed on Senate General Calendar (5/14/2025).
- Committee activity in House included adoption & child welfare committee hearings and favorable substituted reports (March–May 2025).
- No explicit effective date shown in provided text.

Potential impact
- Raises the evidentiary threshold for agency/employee failures to be considered “blatant disregard,” potentially narrowing some neglect findings tied to institutional care.
- Extends child‑protection frameworks to young adults (18–22) in licensed programs, bringing them under abuse/neglect definitions in facility contexts.
- Strengthens legal protections for parents/guardians who are victims of domestic violence by creating a presumption against removal based solely on their being a victim — court may still remove custody if independent abuse/neglect acts by that parent/guardian are found.

Limitations / open points
- The bill text supplied does not specify an effective date or implementation guidance (training, agency rule changes, or resource implications).
- How courts and DCFS will operationalize the “real, significant and imminent likelihood” and “blatant disregard” standards will be determined in practice and future case law.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.