A measure that would require Child Protective Services to release information in fatality and near-fatality cases has left lawmakers debating whether more transparency would save children's lives or contribute to their suffering by exposing personal stories. H2454, proposed by Rep. Jonathan Paton, R-30, would require CPS to provide information "promptly" to anyone who requests it, unless providing that information would cause a "specific, material harm" to an investigation.

The legislation passed the House, 47-12, and goes next to the Senate, where it will be heard March 27 in the Public Safety and Human Services Committee.

Paton defended the bill and his floor amendment on March 19.

"We feel that this amendment protects privacy while still allowing the citizens of this state to have more accountability with CPS," Paton said.

Rep. Pete Rios, D-23, explained his opposition by recalling his own experience working for CPS.

"I was a CPS worker when I first got out of graduate school – a long time ago," Rios said. "Family composition has changed, some of the problems have changed, but the damaged child has not changed."

The files can be graphic, with pictures and details of unspeakable crimes committed against children, Rios said.

"You don't know what you're opening up when you're opening up CPS records," he cautioned. Rios also said withholding the names of the children involved in CPS cases will not ensure their anonymity.

In small communities, "everybody knows everybody else's business," he said. "I don't want to re-victimize the victim."

Rep. David Lujan, D-15, said the legislation was a step in the right direction toward shedding more light on CPS operations, but questioned whether the bill would unintentionally set up an adversarial relationship between CPS and the county attorneys.

The wording of the legislation states that if CPS feels the decision to release specific information will harm an ongoing investigation, CPS may petition a superior court judge to not withhold it.

"It also puts CPS in the bad position of having to challenge the county attorney in court should they disagree with the release of those records," Lujan said. "That is counterproductive to what we're trying to do."

Assistant minority leader, Rep. Jack Brown, D-5, said the House needed to take more time with the bill and not rush it through the process. Brown said he wanted to take the information to his constituents in eastern Arizona and cast his vote after hearing their opinions on the legislation.

Paton had testified that he had spoken with members of the Maricopa and Pima county attorneys' offices, who voiced their support, but Brown said he wanted to get a more complete opinion.

"The last time I counted, we had 15 county attorneys," Brown said. "I wonder what the other 13 thought."

Still, Paton emphasized that CPS may file with superior court if they wish, but are not required to do anything.

"We've heard a lot of language articulated on the floor of this House that says they're going to be forced into an adversarial relationship," he said. "I don't see any of it.

"It gives the public one more chance to find out the truth. And the bottom line is: The fact that the truth has been hidden for so long has contributed to tragedies in this state."

Paton closed his argument passionately, saying transparency within CPS is the key to saving children's lives.

"In my county alone," he said, "there were six children who all had three things in common. Number one, CPS investigated their parents for abuse. Two, CPS determined their parents were safe. And three, all six children are dead.

"I don't believe that we can get to the truth unless we can shine the light of day on what any government agency is doing."