In re Interest of Becka P, 298 Neb. 98

Parents Robert P. and Veronica M. are guardians of three children (Becka P., Thomas P., and Robert P., Jr.); prior neglect allegations existed but earlier claims were found unfounded.
In December 2015 the State filed juvenile petitions after multiple citations for failing to use child safety restraints and evidence that a child rode unrestrained during several accidents. The children were adjudicated delinquent/juvenile and that adjudication was later affirmed on appeal.
While appeals were pending, the juvenile court appointed an educational surrogate for the children; that appointment was later affirmed by this court.
At a November 10, 2016 dispositional hearing DHHS recommended family preservation with custody returned to the parents and the surrogate retained for educational issues; the guardian ad litem opposed immediate return of custody.
The juvenile court declined DHHS’s recommendation, kept custody with DHHS, and ordered DHHS to ensure the children’s immunizations were up to date and to pay if parents/insurance could not. The parents appealed only the court’s authority to order immunizations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Robert & Veronica)	Defendant's Argument (State/DHHS)	Held
Whether the juvenile court had authority to order DHHS to immunize the children	Court lacked authority under § 43-285(1); court may only "assent" to DHHS decisions and DHHS did not recommend immunizations	Juvenile court may impose conditions for juveniles remaining at home under § 43-288, including requiring medical care such as immunizations	Court affirmed: juvenile court had authority under § 43-288 to order immunizations and did not err

In re Interest of Becka P. et al., 296 Neb. 365, 894 N.W.2d 247 (2017) (earlier related appeal affirming adjudication and addressing appellate posture)
In re Interest of Carmelo G., 296 Neb. 805, 896 N.W.2d 902 (2017) (statement of appellate review standards for juvenile cases)