S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   1721
 
                        2019-2020 Regular Sessions
 
                           I N  A S S E M B L Y
 
                             January 16, 2019
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by M. of A. SIMON, COLTON, CRESPO, GALEF, GOTTFRIED, MOSLEY,
   L. ROSENTHAL, BENEDETTO, BLAKE, ORTIZ, WEPRIN, LUPARDO, QUART, JAFFEE,
   GOODELL, D'URSO, TITUS, JOHNS, ZEBROWSKI, LAWRENCE, MONTESANO,  STECK,
   ABINANTI,  M. L. MILLER,  HYNDMAN  --  Multi-Sponsored  by -- M. of A.
   ARROYO, BLANKENBUSH, COOK,  CROUCH,  HEVESI,  MALLIOTAKIS,  McDONOUGH,
   PRETLOW, SEAWRIGHT -- read once and referred to the Committee on Judi-
   ciary
 
 AN  ACT to amend the domestic relations law and the family court act, in
   relation to prohibiting the making of decisions  concerning  guardian-
   ship,  custody or visitation or adoption petitions solely on the basis
   of a parent's, guardian's or custodian's blindness; and to  amend  the
   social  services  law,  in  relation  to prohibiting the department of
   social services from denying,  deciding  or  opposing  a  petition  or
   request  for  guardianship,  custody  or visitation solely because the
   petitioner is blind and to prohibiting a local social services  agency
   from  taking actions solely because a parent, custodian or guardian is
   blind
 
   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

   Section  1.  This  act  shall  be known and may be cited as the "blind
 persons right to parent act".
   § 2. Legislative intent. The legislature finds the following:
   a. All blind Americans have the right to found a family, to freely and
 responsibly decide on the number and spacing of their children,  and  to
 retain  the  custody  of  their offspring on an equal basis with others.
 This right to parent is rooted in the due process clause  of  the  Four-
 teenth  Amendment;  however,  blind  people  are often stripped of these
 constitutional rights when state statutes, judicial decisions, and child
 welfare practices are based on the presumption that  blindness  automat-
 ically means parental incompetence.
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD01687-01-9
              

 A. 1721                             2
 
   b.  The presumption that blindness automatically means parental incom-
 petence is a misconception. Given the proper tools and education, blind-
 ness can be reduced to a physical nuisance. Because many sighted  people
 do  not  understand  the  techniques that blind people use to accomplish
 everyday  tasks,  sighted  judges,  social  workers,  and state official
 assume that those tasks cannot be completed by a blind  person.    Using
 alternative  techniques, blind people are capable of living independent,
 productive lives, which include providing  safe  and  loving  homes  for
 their  children.  For  example, blind people put small tactile dots over
 markers on stoves, washing machines, and other  flat  surfaces  so  that
 they  can independently operate those devices. Specific to raising chil-
 dren, blind parents may have their young children wear a small  bell  on
 their  shoes so the child's location can be known to the parents.  Blind
 parents will also pull a stroller  behind  them  rather  than  push  the
 stroller  in  front  of  them so their long white cane or guide dog will
 find obstacles or enter an intersection before the child and stroller.
   c. When sighted parents are involved in  a  guardianship,  custody  or
 visitation  proceeding,  their parental capabilities and how those capa-
 bilities affect the best interest of the child are thoroughly  evaluated
 through a careful review of evidence. Too often, however, judges summar-
 ily  dismiss  a blind parent's capabilities under the misconception that
 blind people are incapable of most anything, despite evidence on  record
 proving  otherwise.  Blind  parents  involved  in these proceedings must
 first overcome any bias or low expectations of the judge, and then  also
 provide  evidence  negating  those  misconceptions  above and beyond the
 normal burden placed on sighted parents.
   d. Widespread misconceptions about blindness  often  trigger  a  state
 agency to act, unsolicited, against the wishes of a blind parent. One of
 many  countless, devastating reports of discrimination occurred in 2010,
 when the state of Missouri wrongfully deemed a blind  couple  unable  to
 care  for  their  2-day old daughter, who remained in protective custody
 until the family was reunited after a 57-day battle. These  parents  had
 done  nothing  to demonstrate parental incompetence other than happening
 to have had a child and been blind, and yet the agency solely considered
 their blindness and decided to take action. In fact, the  Missouri  case
 and  many  others,  the parents had voluntarily contacted social service
 officials themselves in order to  seek  advice  and  assistance  and  to
 ensure that all of their child's needs were being met, but instead found
 themselves stripped of custody. Thus, hasty actions on the part of state
 social  welfare  officials  can  discourage  blind  parents from seeking
 services and assistance for which they and their children are eligible.
   e. During custody proceedings in cases of divorce, where one parent is
 blind and the other is sighted, the sighted parent will often try to use
 the other parent's blindness as a tool to deny the blind  parent  custo-
 dial  rights. Because custody proceedings related to a divorce are often
 hostile, the court should demand that each party demonstrate evidence of
 the other party's incompetence. However, courts often  assume  that  the
 sighted party is accurate in portraying the blind parent as incompetent,
 and  make custody and visitation decisions based solely on the fact that
 one parent is blind. These decisions can range from limiting or  denying
 visitation  unless  a  sighted  person is present at all times to simply
 denying the blind parent all custodial rights. This is not only  discri-
 minatory;  it denies the blind parent a fair chance at custody and opens
 courts to manipulation.
   § 3. The domestic relations law is amended by  adding  a  new  section
 75-m to read as follows:

 A. 1721                             3
 
   §  75-M.  CONSIDERATION  OF  BLINDNESS DURING GUARDIANSHIP, CUSTODY OR
 VISITATION PROCEEDINGS.  1. THE COURT MAY NOT DENY OR DECIDE A  PETITION
 FOR  GUARDIANSHIP,  CUSTODY  OR  VISITATION SOLELY ON THE BASIS THAT THE
 PETITIONER IS BLIND. THE BLINDNESS OF THE PETITIONER SHALL BE CONSIDERED
 RELEVANT  ONLY  TO THE EXTENT THAT THE COURT FINDS, BASED ON EVIDENCE IN
 THE RECORD, THAT THE BLINDNESS AFFECTS THE BEST INTERESTS OF  THE  CHILD
 WHOSE  GUARDIANSHIP,  CUSTODY  OR VISITATION IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETI-
 TION.
   2. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "BLIND" OR "BLINDNESS" MEANS:
   A. VISION THAT IS 20/200 OR LESS IN THE BEST CORRECTED EYE; OR
   B. VISION THAT SUBTENDS AN ANGLE OF NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY DEGREES IN
 THE BEST CORRECTED EYE.
   § 4. The domestic relations law is amended by  adding  a  new  section
 111-d to read as follows:
   §  111-D.  CONSIDERATION  OF BLINDNESS DURING ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS. 1.
 THE COURT MAY NOT DENY OR DECIDE A PETITION FOR ADOPTION SOLELY  ON  THE
 BASIS  THAT  THE  PETITIONER  IS  BLIND. THE BLINDNESS OF THE PETITIONER
 SHALL BE CONSIDERED RELEVANT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT  THE  COURT  FINDS,
 BASED  ON  EVIDENCE  IN  THE RECORD, THAT THE BLINDNESS AFFECTS THE BEST
 INTERESTS OF THE CHILD WHOSE ADOPTION IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION.
   2. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "BLIND" OR "BLINDNESS" MEANS:
   A. VISION THAT IS 20/200 OR LESS IN THE BEST CORRECTED EYE; OR
   B. VISION THAT SUBTENDS AN ANGLE OF NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY DEGREES IN
 THE BEST CORRECTED EYE.
   § 5. The family court act is amended by adding a new  section  643  to
 read as follows:
   § 643. CONSIDERATION OF BLINDNESS DURING ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS. 1.  THE
 COURT MAY NOT DENY OR DECIDE A PETITION FOR ADOPTION SOLELY ON THE BASIS
 THAT  THE  PETITIONER IS BLIND. THE BLINDNESS OF THE PETITIONER SHALL BE
 CONSIDERED RELEVANT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THE COURT  FINDS,  BASED  ON
 EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, THAT THE BLINDNESS AFFECTS THE BEST INTERESTS OF
 THE CHILD WHOSE ADOPTION IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION.
   2. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "BLIND" OR "BLINDNESS" MEANS:
   A. VISION THAT IS 20/200 OR LESS IN THE BEST CORRECTED EYE; OR
   B. VISION THAT SUBTENDS AN ANGLE OF NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY DEGREES IN
 THE BEST CORRECTED EYE.
   §  6.  The  family court act is amended by adding a new section 658 to
 read as follows:
   § 658. CONSIDERATION OF  BLINDNESS  DURING  GUARDIANSHIP,  CUSTODY  OR
 VISITATION  PROCEEDINGS.  1. THE COURT MAY NOT DENY OR DECIDE A PETITION
 FOR CUSTODY OR VISITATION UNDER THIS PART  OR  GUARDIANSHIP  UNDER  PART
 FOUR  OF  THIS ARTICLE SOLELY ON THE BASIS THAT THE PETITIONER IS BLIND.
 THE BLINDNESS OF THE PETITIONER SHALL BE CONSIDERED RELEVANT ONLY TO THE
 EXTENT THAT THE COURT FINDS, BASED ON EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD,  THAT  THE
 BLINDNESS  AFFECTS  THE  BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD WHOSE GUARDIANSHIP,
 CUSTODY OR VISITATION IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION.
   2. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "BLIND" OR "BLINDNESS" MEANS:
   A. VISION THAT IS 20/200 OR LESS IN THE BEST CORRECTED EYE; OR
   B. VISION THAT SUBTENDS AN ANGLE OF NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY DEGREES IN
 THE BEST CORRECTED EYE.
   § 7. The social services law is amended by adding a new section 393 to
 read as follows:
   § 393. CONSIDERATION OF  BLINDNESS  DURING  GUARDIANSHIP,  CUSTODY  OR
 ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS. 1. THE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT DENY, DECIDE OR OPPOSE A
 PETITION  OR  REQUEST FOR GUARDIANSHIP, CUSTODY OR VISITATION UNDER THIS
 ARTICLE SOLELY ON THE BASIS THAT THE  PETITIONER,  PARENT,  GUARDIAN  OR

 A. 1721                             4
 
 CUSTODIAN IS BLIND. THE BLINDNESS OF THE PETITIONER, PARENT, GUARDIAN OR
 CUSTODIAN  SHALL  BE  CONSIDERED  RELEVANT  ONLY  TO THE EXTENT THAT THE
 BLINDNESS AFFECTS THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE  CHILD  WHOSE  GUARDIANSHIP,
 CUSTODY OR VISITATION IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION.
   2.  THE  DEPARTMENT  SHALL NOT SEEK CUSTODY OR GUARDIANSHIP OF A CHILD
 SOLELY BECAUSE THE CHILD'S PARENT, GUARDIAN OR CUSTODIAN IS  BLIND.  THE
 BLINDNESS OF THE PARENT, GUARDIAN OR CUSTODIAN SHALL BE CONSIDERED RELE-
 VANT ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THE BLINDNESS AFFECTS THE BEST INTERESTS OF
 THE  CHILD  WHOSE  GUARDIANSHIP, CUSTODY OR VISITATION IS THE SUBJECT OF
 THE PETITION.
   3. AS USED IN THIS SECTION, "BLIND" OR "BLINDNESS" MEANS:
   A. VISION THAT IS 20/200 OR LESS IN THE BEST CORRECTED EYE; OR
   B. VISION THAT SUBTENDS AN ANGLE OF NOT GREATER THAN TWENTY DEGREES IN
 THE BEST CORRECTED EYE.
   § 8. The commissioner of social services is authorized and directed to
 promulgate rules and regulations necessary for the implementation of the
 provisions of this act on or before its effective date.
   § 9. This act shall take effect on the ninetieth day  after  it  shall
 have become a law.