Virginia House of Delegates Passes New Background Check Law for Adoptions

By Michael Klazema on 2/7/2018
Virginia legislators recently voted their approval of three new bills related to adoption. One of the bills would ramp up background checks for adoptive parents in the state.

According to an official press release from the Virginia House of Delegates Republican Caucus, House Bill 227 received bipartisan support from House legislators. The bill, initially proposed by Republican delegate Christopher Stolle, would require circuit courts to conduct "national criminal history background checks” on all adoptive parents. The results of this thorough background check would tell circuit courts whether an additional investigative step was necessary before finalizing the adoption.

House Bill 227 was inspired by a recent case in Virginia Beach, where a young adopted woman was found dead after a drug overdose. Following the incident, authorities investigated and discovered the girl’s adoptive parent had a criminal history with multiple felony convictions. A thorough background check before the adoption would have uncovered these red flags.

Stolle called background checks for adoptive parents “a common-sense step” to make sure the state isn’t placing children with dangerous parents or families. He said he is hopeful House Bill 227 will prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future.

Circuit courts have the option of ordering an investigation or report on an adoptive parent before entering a final order of adoption. Often, this step is skipped, which means the state doesn’t know everything about adoptive parents before making final adoption decisions.

Under House Bill 227, circuit courts would still have the ultimate power to decide whether to conduct an investigation of adoptive parents. However, before deciding to order or skip the investigation process, each court would be legally required to conduct and consider the results from a national background check. The goal of this requirement is to prevent courts from overlooking important information or neglecting their duty to ensure the safety and well-being of adopted children.

Currently, the text of the legislative bill does not specify what Stolle means by “national criminal history background checks.” Based on the language, the intention is likely to screen adoptive parents through the FBI’s multi-jurisdictional criminal record database.

House Bill 227 passes through the House of Delegates alongside two other pieces of legislation aimed at protecting adopted children.

The second bill, House Bill 241, changes how long the state requires a child to live with a close family member before the family member is eligible to apply for adoption. Previously, the law required a three-year window to pass before the family member could start adoption proceedings. The new bill, aimed at helping children adjust and find stability in new homes, will change the waiting period to two years.

The third bill, House Bill 291 is meant to streamline access to adoption files for adopters and adoptees. Going forward, people involved in adoptions will be able to gain easier access to files relevant to their cases.


Industry News

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.