WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1035

making the chapter relative to the register of deeds gender neutral.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Bryan Morse

Defines independent activity and shields ordinary unsupervised child activities from CINS or neglect charges, unless caregiver recklessness endangers safety.

Inexpedient to Legislate: MA VV 02/05/2026 HJ 3 P. 13
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1035

HB 1035 — Permissible Unsupervised Activity (Summary)

Status: First reading; referred to Committee on Judiciary
Introduced: November 12, 2024
Primary subject: Juvenile law / neglect of dependents — defines “independent activity” and limits when unsupervised activity alone can make a child a “child in need of services” or support a neglect prosecution.
Planned effective date (if enacted): July 1, 2026

Purpose

To clarify that ordinary unsupervised activities by children (e.g., walking, playing outside, staying at home) are not, by themselves, grounds for juvenile intervention or criminal neglect charges. The bill defines “independent activity,” narrows the circumstances in which a child is a “child in need of services” (CINS) because of unsupervised activity, and creates a statutory defense against neglect prosecutions when a caregiver reasonably believed the activity was not dangerous.

Key provisions

  • Adds a new statutory definition of “independent activity” (IC 31‑9‑2‑58.1 / IC 35‑31.5‑2‑168.2 / IC 35‑46‑1‑1). Examples explicitly listed:
    • Traveling on foot, by bicycle, or by public transportation
    • Playing outdoors
    • Remaining at home
    • Remaining in a stationary vehicle
  • Amends the juvenile code (IC 31‑34‑1‑1) so that a child is not a CINS solely because the child engages in an independent activity, unless the parent/guardian/custodian’s conduct is so reckless that it endangers the child’s health or safety given the child’s maturity, condition, and ability.
  • Adds/clarifies criminal statutes regarding neglect of a dependent (IC 35‑46‑1‑4 and related definitions) to:
    • Include the independent-activity definition in that chapter.
    • Provide an explicit affirmative defense to neglect prosecution when the accused reasonably believed the independent activity was not dangerous.
  • Technical amendments place the new definitions and cross-references in the appropriate code sections dealing with juvenile services and dependent/neglect offenses.

Who is affected

  • Parents, guardians, and custodians: reduces the likelihood that ordinary unsupervised activities will trigger juvenile or criminal proceedings.
  • Children: clarifies protections for normal independent behavior.
  • Child protective services, juvenile courts, prosecutors, and law enforcement: changes intake/charging discretion and evidentiary threshold when unsupervised activity is the sole basis for intervention or criminal neglect charges.
  • Schools, daycare providers, and community organizations may be affected indirectly by altered reporting/triage practices.

Legal standard and burden

  • The bill preserves intervention/prosecution where caregiver conduct is reckless to the point of endangering the child’s health or safety, assessed in light of the child’s maturity, condition, and ability.
  • The accused caregiver may assert a defense that they reasonably believed the independent activity was not dangerous.

Timeline / Procedure

  • If enacted as drafted, the bill’s effective date is July 1, 2026.
  • At introduction it has been given first reading and referred to the Judiciary Committee for consideration.

Potential effects / considerations

  • Expected to reduce filings and investigations based solely on routine unsupervised activities and to protect family autonomy.
  • May shift the official focus toward cases involving clear recklessness or objective danger.
  • Could prompt changes in CPS screening policies and prosecutorial charging guidelines to reflect the new statutory baseline.
  • Implementation may require training for child welfare workers, law enforcement, and courts to apply the “maturity/condition/ability” standard and the “reasonable belief” defense consistently.

This summary focuses on the bill’s substantive changes to juvenile and neglect law; it does not analyze legislative support/opposition or predict enactment.

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

Sign in to ask a question.