To amend section 5103.17 and to enact sections 3107.018, 3107.019, 5103.171, and 5180.23 of the Revised Code regarding availability of information on and advertisement of adoptable children.
HB865 revises Ohio law governing how adoption information is shared and how adoptable children may be advertised. It requires public children services agencies to respond to requests for adoption information or applications within three business days, and it directs agencies’ websites to link to the state adoption guide, the “It Takes Heart” adoption site, and agency contact information and process descriptions prepared by the Department of Children and Youth. The bill also creates a centralized, password-protected database on the state adoption website containing profiles of children available for adoption, with profiles prepared by agencies and, in some cases, attorneys.
The bill sets detailed rules for who may create and view profiles and what those profiles may contain. Only qualified adoptive parents with completed training and an approved, unexpired home study may access the database, and children age 12 or older must consent before a profile is created. Profiles may not include personally identifiable information, medical or disability-related information, or pictures or videos, and children may request removal of their profiles. The bill also limits publication of adoptable-child profiles to the state database and requires annual reporting by public children services agencies on adoptions, children available for adoption, and ages of children available for adoption, with some data suppression when counts are below ten.
In addition, HB865 amends Ohio’s restrictions on adoption advertising. It generally prohibits persons or entities other than certified private agencies and public children services agencies from advertising that they will adopt children or place them in foster homes, while expressly allowing biological parents to advertise placement of a child for adoption to qualified adoptive parents, allowing qualified adoptive parents to advertise their availability to adopt, and allowing government entities to advertise their role and relevant adoption information. The bill also continues to prohibit exchanging money or anything of value for placement of a child for adoption and directs enforcement to the attorney general or local prosecutors through injunctive relief or criminal charge.
The bill’s impact on state law would be to centralize and standardize adoption-related information, expand state oversight of adoption profiles, and create new procedural duties for agencies and the Department of Children and Youth. It would also add a new annual reporting requirement to the department and public children services agencies, while tightening the rules around where and how adoptable children can be publicly described. Existing section 5103.17 would be repealed and replaced, and the new sections would become part of Ohio’s adoption and child welfare framework.
No committee votes or transcript discussion were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or vote history to gauge sentiment or identify specific objections. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at improving access to adoption information and increasing transparency and coordination in the adoption process, while also protecting children’s privacy through consent requirements and limits on published information.
HB865 would amend Ohio’s adoption advertising statute and create new sections requiring faster agency responses, standardized adoption information on agency websites, a centralized state-run adoption profile database, and annual reporting on adoption activity. It would affect public children services agencies, private child placing agencies, private noncustodial agencies, attorneys involved in adoption, qualified adoptive parents, biological parents, and the Department of Children and Youth, while repealing and replacing existing section 5103.17.
No votes or committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no documented sentiment from lawmakers or witnesses. From the bill text, the policy direction appears generally pro-adoption and administrative in nature, with an emphasis on improving access to information and streamlining adoption matching while adding privacy safeguards for children.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the new centralized database, the restriction that only the state may publish profiles of adoptable children, and the consent rules for children age 12 and older. Privacy advocates may focus on the limits on profile content and the child’s ability to request removal, while adoption advocates may debate whether the bill goes far enough in expanding access or whether the new procedures create additional administrative burdens for agencies and attorneys. The advertising restrictions and enforcement provisions could also raise questions about the scope of permissible private adoption outreach and the role of government in adoption placement.