Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. H. (In re K. M. P.)
292 Or. App. 733
Or. Ct. App.2018Background
- Mother has a long history of methamphetamine use with periods of treatment, relapse, and claimed sobriety; she admitted limited use in May and August 2017 and said she was clean by mid‑August 2017. K (age 10) never witnessed drug use and only learned of the recent relapse from a friend.
- Mother lived with a domestic partner, W; from late 2016 through at least August 2017 they argued frequently—often loudly and behind a locked bedroom door; K heard yelling, objects falling, and saw parents push against the bedroom door but never observed physical violence.
- K testified she was scared during fights, felt unsafe when arguments occurred, and was relieved to move in with her grandmothers; K also said mother always met day‑to‑day needs.
- DHS filed a dependency petition alleging (1) mother’s substance abuse interfered with safe parenting and (2) mother exposed K to domestic violence; father stipulated to his own substance‑abuse‑based jurisdictional allegation.
- At trial the juvenile court found K credible and mother not credible, and it asserted jurisdiction on both grounds. Mother appealed, arguing insufficiency of the evidence for both bases.
Issues
| Issue | DHS's Argument | Mother's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mother’s substance abuse supported jurisdiction under ORS 419B.100(1)(c) | Court could infer continued use despite mother’s testimony; K was aware of use and mother’s behavior changed when using | No evidence mother used while caring for K, K never saw use, mother met child’s needs, and mother testified she was sober months before trial | Reversed: evidence insufficient to show a current, likely threat of serious loss or injury from mother’s substance use |
| Whether exposure to frequent parental arguments (domestic violence) supported jurisdiction | Frequency, intensity, and duration of arguments plus K’s fear and emotional effects established risk of harm | Arguments were verbal only, no physical injury, K never witnessed violence, emotional effects were not shown to be serious or likely to be realized | Reversed: evidence insufficient to show a current, likely threat of serious loss or injury from exposure to arguments |
| Whether the allegations together (totality) established jurisdiction | Combined allegations could be more compelling than each alone; K linked mother’s drug use to the fights | The record does not show that the two allegations heightened the risk to K beyond each alone | Reversed: combined view did not create the necessary showing of a likely, serious risk |
| Standard for juvenile‑court jurisdiction based on emotional harm | DHS relied on case law that emotional/psychological harm can, in some cases, support jurisdiction if severity and likelihood are shown | Mother argued DHS must present evidence of type, degree, duration, nexus, and non‑speculative likelihood; DHS failed to do so here | Court affirmed that emotional harm can ground jurisdiction but requires concrete evidence of serious harm reasonably likely to occur; here DHS failed that showing |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Human Services v. A. W., 276 Or. App. 276 (Or. App.) (emotional or speculative exposure insufficient; need evidence of likely, serious harm)
- Dept. of Human Services v. J. J. B., 291 Or. App. 226 (Or. App.) (parental methamphetamine use alone does not establish jurisdiction absent evidence of harm)
- Dept. of Human Services v. K. C. F., 282 Or. App. 12 (Or. App.) (reversed where evidence lacked present risk of serious harm from parental conflict)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. D. I., 259 Or. App. 116 (Or. App.) (state must prove severity of potential psychological harm sufficient for jurisdiction)
- Dept. of Human Services v. M. E., 255 Or. App. 296 (Or. App.) (reversed where state failed to show nature and likelihood of emotional/physical injury from parental conduct)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. M., 284 Or. App. 521 (Or. App.) (distinguished: there was risk of physical injury in that case)
- State v. S. T. S., 236 Or. App. 646 (Or. App.) (close case where evidence of physical violence supported jurisdiction)