In re Interest of Becka P, 298 Neb. 98

Parents Robert P. and Veronica M. are parents of three children who were the subject of juvenile proceedings after multiple prior safety-related incidents and citations for failing to use child restraints.
In December 2015 the State filed juvenile petitions; the children were adjudicated and that adjudication was affirmed on appeal by the Court of Appeals.
While appeals were pending, the juvenile court appointed an educational surrogate for the children; that appointment was previously appealed and affirmed by this Court.
At a November 10, 2016 dispositional hearing, DHHS recommended family preservation and returning custody to the parents, leaving the surrogate in place for education.
The juvenile court rejected DHHS’s recommendation, continued custody with DHHS, and ordered among other things that DHHS confirm and, if necessary, update the children’s immunizations, with DHHS to pay if parents and insurance could not.
Robert and Veronica appealed solely on the ground that the juvenile court lacked authority to order DHHS to immunize the children.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the juvenile court had authority to order DHHS to update the children’s immunizations	Robert & Veronica: court lacks power to impose its own conditions; § 43-285(1) only allows DHHS to determine care with court assent, and DHHS did not request immunizations	State: disposition statutes (including § 43-288) authorize the court to impose conditions related to medical care when juveniles remain in or return to the home	Court affirmed: § 43-288(2) authorizes the court to require provision of medical care (including immunizations) as a condition of disposition, so the order was lawful

In re Interest of Becka P. et al., 296 Neb. 365, 894 N.W.2d 247 (Neb. 2017) (prior appeal and disposition issues)
In re Interest of Carmelo G., 296 Neb. 805, 896 N.W.2d 902 (Neb. 2017) (standards for appellate review in juvenile cases)