HB 3835
Modifies provisions regarding the use of restraint and involuntary seclusion on certain young people.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
At the request of
(at the request of System of Care Advisory Council, Department of Human Services)
Committee
Ways and Means
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
29%
Oppose
71%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill makes changes to laws regarding the care and treatment of young people, particularly focusing on the use of restraint and involuntary seclusion. It modifies existing rules to ensure these practices are used only as a last resort, with alternative interventions prioritized. The bill also establishes an Oregon Institute for Youth Health Systems and directs the System of Care Advisory Council to report on implementation. An emergency declaration makes the changes effective immediately.
Key provisions
- Modifies definitions of ‘chemical restraint,’ ‘child in care,’ ‘restraint,’ and ‘involuntary seclusion’ to align with best practices and reduce potential for misuse.
- Prohibits the use of restraint and involuntary seclusion for discipline, punishment, or convenience.
- Establishes procedures for reporting and investigating incidents involving restraint or seclusion.
- Requires agencies to prioritize less restrictive interventions before resorting to restraint or seclusion.
- Creates an Oregon Institute for Youth Health Systems to support youth behavioral health care.
- Directs the System of Care Advisory Council to provide reports on implementation of the changes.
- Establishes guidelines for secure transportation services for children in care.
- Addresses financial exploitation of children in care.
Who is affected
- Young people (under 21)
- Child-caring agencies
- Foster parents
- School districts
- Healthcare providers
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Here's a synthesized paragraph representing the collective views expressed in the Support testimony summaries: Testifiers generally express strong support for House Bill 3835, citing its potential to improve safety, access, and quality of care for Oregon children in need. They highlight concerns about current laws leading to a reduction in psychiatric beds, diverting youth to emergency departments, and staff being reported for necessary interventions. the need for more flexible care options, trauma-informed responses, and clarification on definitions of unlawful restraint and seclusion. Many argue that the bill aims to correct inconsistencies in child abuse and neglect definitions, prevent unnecessary investigations, and ensure fair treatment of staff while safeguarding student rights and well-being. Additionally, support for improving Oregon's continuum of service within a system of care lens, addressing issues such as access to care for youth, regulatory challenges, and the need for youth-centric services in behavioral health.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of House Bill 3835 express strong concerns about its potential impact on vulnerable children in Oregon. They argue that the bill's provisions would weaken protections for children, particularly in schools and foster care systems, by limiting investigations into child abuse and neglect, and reducing accountability for agencies responsible for keeping children safe. Testifiers also raise concerns about the redefinition of "serious physical harm" under the bill, which they believe could lead to Oregon courts interpreting the term in a way that compromises a child's safe survival. Additionally, opponents argue that the bill would gut critical safeguards for children with disabilities and create unnecessary risks by lowering standards for restraint and seclusion. Many the need for more comprehensive protections and support for vulnerable children, rather than relying on measures that they believe would expose them to more harm.