Section 48.243. Basic rights: duty of intake worker.

 

(1)  Before conferring with the parent, expectant mother or child during the intake inquiry, the intake worker shall personally inform parents, expectant mothers and children 12 years of age or older who are the focus of an inquiry regarding the need for protection or services that the referral may result in a petition to the court and of all of the following:

(a) What allegations could be in the petition.

(b) The nature and possible consequences of the proceedings.

(c) The right to remain silent and the fact that silence of any party may be relevant.

(d) The right to confront and cross-examine those appearing against them.

(e) The right to counsel under s. 48.23 .

(f) The right to present and subpoena witnesses.

(g) The right to a jury trial.

(h) The right to have the allegations of the petition proved by clear and convincing evidence.

(3)  If the child or expectant mother has not had a hearing under s. 48.21 or 48.213 and was not present at an intake conference under s. 48.24 , the intake worker shall inform the child, parent, guardian and legal custodian, or expectant mother, as appropriate, of the basic rights provided under this section. The notice shall be given verbally, either in person or by telephone, and in writing. This notice shall be given so as to allow the child, parent, guardian, legal custodian or adult expectant mother sufficient time to prepare for the plea hearing. This subsection does not apply to cases of informal disposition under s. 48.245 .

(4)  This section does not apply if the child or expectant mother was present at a hearing under s. 48.21 or 48.213 .

1977 c. 354 ; 1979 c. 300 ; 1985 a. 311 ; 1987 a. 27 ; 1995 a. 27 , 77 ; 1997 a. 35 , 292 . A CHIPS proceeding is not a criminal proceeding within the meaning of the 5th amendment. Miranda warnings are not required to be given to the CHIPS petition subject, even though the individual is in custody and subject to interrogation, in order for the subject's statements to be admissible. State v. Thomas J.W. 213 Wis. 2d 264 , 570 N.W.2d 586 (Ct. App. 1997), 97-0506 .