Family Law - Temporary and Final Protective Orders - Duration
HB0497 creates a new set of rules for “youth transportation companies” that transport children to residential child care programs. The bill defines the kinds of programs covered, including certain residential, wilderness, boot camp, boarding school, and behavioral modification settings serving children with mental health, substance use, developmental, physical, or sensory disabilities, while excluding hospitals, detention facilities, youth correctional facilities, substance abuse treatment facilities, foster family homes, and other secure facilities.
The bill prohibits these transportation companies from using blindfolds, hoods, and most mechanical restraints, and limits the use of physical restraints to situations involving an immediate and serious risk of harm when no less restrictive alternative is available. It also bars pickups between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m., except for companies under contract with the Department of Human Services. The law authorizes enforcement actions by both the Attorney General and private individuals, with statutory damages, restitution, compensatory damages, attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief available in certain cases. The act applies prospectively and takes effect October 1, 2025.
HB0497 amends the Maryland Human Services Article by adding a new Part III governing transportation companies that move children to residential child care programs. It establishes statutory definitions, creates conduct standards for transport, limits restraint practices, restricts late-night pickups, and adds civil enforcement mechanisms. The bill affects youth transport businesses, residential child care programs, the Attorney General, and private plaintiffs, while preserving an exception for state-contracted transport services through the Department of Human Services.
The available context suggests the bill was enacted without recorded controversy in the provided materials, and the final Senate vote was unanimous at 41-0 with amendments. That vote pattern indicates broad bipartisan support for the measure’s child-safety focus and its regulation of transport practices involving vulnerable youth. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no evidence in the record here of organized opposition or divided sentiment.
The main policy issues raised by the bill’s text are the scope of the restraint ban, the narrow emergency exception for physical restraints, and the prohibition on pickups between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. Critics of similar measures often focus on whether transport staff need broader discretion for safety and whether the rules could complicate operations for programs serving high-needs youth. The bill also creates private rights of action and Attorney General enforcement, which may be viewed as strengthening accountability but could be contested by industry as increasing litigation exposure. However, no specific objections or named opponents appear in the provided discussion materials.