Department of Human Services v. S. T.
2010 Ore. App. LEXIS 1663
| Or. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- DHS petitioned for a permanency plan for the child in foster care with nonrelatives; the child was five years old and had been in substitute care for one-third of his life.
- The child was bonded to his mother, father, and his foster parents; DHS argued for adoption, while the mother argued for guardianship.
- Open adoption discussions were at the hearing; the parties understood open adoption to involve continuing contact between child and birth relatives under ORS 109.305.
- The foster mother desired an open adoption, and DHS anticipated one; DHS would recruit an adoptive family open to continued contact if the current foster family could not adopt.
- Dr. Giesick and Monahan recommended permanency with continued contact with the birth family, with Giesick prioritizing permanency and Monahan supporting mediation for ongoing contact if adopted.
- The juvenile court found an open adoption would best meet the child’s needs and stated that adoption would be pursued if the foster parents could be the adoptive placement and agree to an open adoption; otherwise a reexamination of permanency would occur.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the plan of adoption was authorized when open adoption was a condition. | Mother argues open adoption is not a statutory permanency option. | DHS argues the court ordered adoption and could consider open adoption as part of the plan. | The court did not order an open adoption; it ordered adoption and allowed for an open adoption if possible. |
| Whether adopting (with potential open adoption) serves child’s health and safety better than guardianship. | Mother contends guardianship would better serve health and safety. | DHS argues adoption with potential open adoption best serves permanency and ongoing contact. | Evidence supported adoption with likely open adoption; court did not err in changing to adoption. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. S.L., 211 Or.App. 362 (2007) (preponderance standard for permanency plans; open adoption considerations)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C.Z., 236 Or.App. 436 (2010) (testing rules for permanency plans and court authority)