Department of Human Services v. T. C. A.
251 Or. App. 407
| Or. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Mother appeals a permanency plan change for AA from adoption to APPLA after remand following reversed termination of rights.
- Priors: in 2008 AA and AF were removed due to parental substance abuse; mother completed treatment but relapsed with heroin; Suboxone used; housing and honesty issues surfaced.
- In 2011, after prior reversal, the court kept adoption as the plan; at a September permanency hearing mother sought reunification while DHS sought APPLA through permanent foster care with AA's maternal grandmother.
- AA thrived in placement with grandmother; mother admitted alcohol use during the period and had housing instability and dishonesty issues, undermining reunification prospects.
- The juvenile court found compelling reasons against return home or other placements, approved APPLA, and ordered DHS to maintain regular contact and extended family involvement; court noted potential for reunification under certain circumstances but did not require it.
- Mother challenges the plan change under ORS 419B.476(2)(a) vs (b) and alleges APPLA compliance failures under OAR 413-070 rules; the court affirmed, holding proper application of law and substantial compliance with rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper statutory framework for APPLA change | Mother argues ORS 419B.476(2)(a) applies due to reunification orientation. | DHS argues only ORS 419B.476(2)(b) applies since plan was adoption at hearing. | Court applied ORS 419B.476(2)(b) and satisfied best-interests analysis. |
| Best interests and compelling reason | Mother contends lack of compelling reasons to avoid return home or adoption. | DHS and court found compelling reasons AA should not be returned home or placed for adoption or other options. | Court did not err; findings supported by record; APPLA chosen within discretion. |
| Compliance with APPLA administrative rules | Mother asserts DHS failed to meet OAR 413-070 requirements for APPLA. | DHS argues substantial compliance shown by committee process, case plan, and services descriptions. | Rules were satisfied; no remand required for deficiencies. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Human Services v. T. C. A., 240 Or App 769 (2011) (reversed termination; remand on evidence and standards)
- N. S., 246 Or App 341 (2011) (standard for reviewing findings of historical fact with evidence support)
- Sjomeling v. Lasser, 251 Or App 172 (2012) (best-interests determinations afford deference; abuse of discretion standard)
- State v. B. B., 240 Or App 75 (2010) (principles on reviewing trial court findings; emphasis on factual support)
- Meier and Meier, 286 Or 437 (1979) (weighing factors in child custody and best-interests decisions)