House Bill 45 would prohibit school personnel from recommending that a parent seek psychiatric treatment for a child. It also would bar the Division of Child and Family Services [DCFS] from taking custody of a minor based "primarily" on a parent's refusal of behavioral treatment.

But most "disturbing" for one child advocate is a provision that would stop juvenile court judges from ordering behavioral evaluations or counseling for abused and neglected children unless there is "serious, imminent risk" to a child's safety or the safety of others.

"If you can't evaluate a child, especially on emotional issues, how can you prove imminent risk?" asked Kristin Brewer, director of the state's Guardian ad Litem, which protects the interests of children caught up in the juvenile court system.

Brewer's opposition was not joined by DCFS officials who attended Wednesday's hearing but saved their testimony for more sweeping parental rights legislation debated later by the committee.

HB45 is a tweaked version of anti-Ritalin legislation promoted in 2002 by Scientologists and that passed the Legislature, but was vetoed by the governor. Both bills seek to curb the prescription of Ritalin and other psychotropic drugs used to correct attention deficit disorder, which is marked by impulsivity, a short attention span and hyperactivity.

"These psychotropic drugs are very experimental in nature. As late as the past year, evidence has come out indicating there are unknown side effects that could have lasting effects on our children," said sponsoring Rep. Mike Morley, R-Spanish Fork.

Educators and child advocates opposed the bill, saying it addresses a problem that doesn't exist and parrots a state Board of Education rule that already bars schools from demanding that a student take medication as a condition of attending school.

Last year, the Disability Law Center gave legal assistance to 339 parents of disabled Utah children in need of special education services, said the center's director, Fraser Nelson. "Not one of those parents raised the issue this bill purports to address. The calls we get are from parents who need help accessing medical and mental health services for their kids."

None of the three parental rights advocates who spoke in favor of the bill offered a real-life example to counter Nelson.

"Is it widespread? Is every school locking rambunctious and sometimes disruptive children out of school? That would be a stretch. But it does happen," Morley said.

kstewart@sltrib.com