Department of Human Services v. J. F. D.
255 Or. App. 742
Or. Ct. App.2013Background
- DHS became involved with D's family in 2011 due to father's anger issues and parents' inability to meet D's basic needs.
- Father moved to Kentucky; mother requested assistance and placed D in a foster home in 2011.
- DHS filed jurisdiction in November 2011; D was taken into protective custody after a shelter hearing; father was not notified of the hearing.
- In March 2012 DHS requested Kentucky ICPC home study of father; record does not show whether study occurred.
- May 29, 2012, the court asserted jurisdiction over D as to father based on his admission about anger issues and need for treatment.
- Dispositional hearing on June 15, 2012 focused on whether DHS made reasonable efforts to prevent elimination of removal; DHS had provided services to mother and D but little to father.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS made reasonable efforts to eliminate removal as to father. | Father: DHS delayed, contacted him little, provided no services to him. | DHS argues totality of circumstances supports reasonableness given out-of-state father and services to mother/D. | No; DHS's efforts were not reasonable as to father; remand required. |
| Whether totality of DHS's efforts can cure lack of direct services to father at dispositional stage. | Father insists analysis must address each parent; no adequacy of efforts to father. | State contends totality of services to mother/D supports reasonableness overall. | Totality must be assessed per parent; DHS failed adequately for father. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Williams, 204 Or App 496 (2006) (two-parent reunification not achieved; separate analysis for father)
- Dept. of Human Services v. D. L. H., 251 Or App 787 (2012) (separate analysis of active efforts for mother and father at permanency)