301 Or. App. 148
Or. Ct. App.2019Background
- Children L (10) and C (5) removed after witnessing father assault their mother; prior DHS dependency (2014–2016) had been dismissed in 2016.
- June 2017 arrest: police found children alone with dangerous paraphernalia; DHS obtained custody and ordered multiple services for father, including substance‑abuse treatment, psychological evaluation, and domestic‑violence/batterer’s intervention “as directed by DHS.”
- Psychologist (Nov 2017) reported father’s history of relapse and domestic violence, recommending at least one year of sobriety before batterer’s intervention could be meaningfully effective.
- Father avoided DHS contact, was arrested twice, entered FSAP and began sobriety in May 2018; the court ordered DHS to refer to FIT and batterer’s intervention in April 2018, but DHS did not refer to batterer’s intervention until Nov 14, 2018.
- Children consistently exhibited trauma and refused contact with father; by the January 2019 permanency hearing children had been in substitute care ~19 months in this case and ~50 of the past 66 months overall.
- Juvenile referee found DHS had made reasonable efforts (referrals, evaluations, treatment facilitation, funding for batterer’s program) and changed permanency plans from reunification to adoption; father appealed arguing the delayed batterer’s intervention referral was unreasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Father's Argument | DHS's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS made reasonable efforts to reunify by delaying referral to batterer’s intervention | DHS unreasonably delayed a court‑ordered critical service so father could not show engagement/progress | Delay was reasonable because father was arrested, avoided contact, and psychologist advised waiting for ~1 year sobriety before batterer’s intervention | Affirmed — DHS’s overall efforts were reasonable under the circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Dept. of Human Services v. C. L. H., 283 Or App 313 (2017) (defines that DHS must give a parent a fair opportunity to demonstrate minimal adequacy)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. M. H., 283 Or App 295 (2017) (allocation of burden: DHS must prove reasonable efforts and insufficient parental progress)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. N., 250 Or App 708 (2012) (reasonableness of withholding a service judged by likely effectiveness)
- Dept. of Human Services v. M. K., 257 Or App 409 (2013) (reasonableness assessed by totality of the circumstances)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. S., 278 Or App 725 (2016) (importance of assessing parental progress during a period long enough to be meaningful)
- Dept. of Human Services v. S. W., 267 Or App 277 (2014) (child safety and particular child‑specific circumstances are paramount)