Department of Human Services v. S. P.
249 Or. App. 76
| Or. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- DHS petitioned for K under ORS 419B.100(1)(c), alleging endangerment by both parents' conditions and circumstances.
- Mother is developmentally disabled and receives ongoing adult services; father has unspecified health and behavioral concerns.
- K was born May 19, 2011; DHS observed mother needing coaching with basic newborn care and unsafe handling in hospital shortly after birth.
- DHS took protective custody; jurisdictional hearing occurred weeks later with limited parental visits and observations.
- Court found K within jurisdiction based on allegations a–e of the amended petition; only mother appeals.
- Mother argues the allegations as to father were improperly framed, and that evidence regarding both parents fails to prove endangerment; DHS supports the jurisdiction finding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the jurisdictional findings as to father were proper | Mother argues the allegations about father shift burden and lack sufficient evidence | DHS contends father’s conduct contributes to combined endangerment and findings are supported by the record | Jurisdictional findings regarding father are not supported by the record; reversed as to father |
| Whether the evidence supports jurisdiction based on mother’s status | Mother contends evidence does not show she cannot meet K’s basic needs or create a current harm | DHS argues mother's developmental disability and need for services endanger K under total circumstances | Evidence insufficient, as a matter of law, to show a reasonable likelihood of harm from mother; jurisdiction reversed and remanded |
| Whether the court properly applied ORS 419B.100(1)(c) in the totality of circumstances | Mother asserts the court overstates disability impact and relies on transient observations | State argues a combined, holistic evaluation supports endangerment | Court erred in sustaining jurisdiction under 419B.100(1)(c); result reversed given insufficiency of evidence on both parents |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. Vanbuskirk, 202 Or.App. 401 (2005) (jurisdiction requires a reasonable likelihood of harm under total circumstances)
- Dept. of Human Services v. C.Z., 236 Or.App. 436 (2010) (standard for determining jurisdiction under ORS 419B.100(1)(c))
- Dept. of Human Services v. A.F., 243 Or. App. 379 (2011) (burden on state to show risk of harm at time of hearing)
- Dept. of Human Services v. D.M., 248 Or.App. 683 (2012) (formulations of endangerment under Smith and A.F.结合)