Moira M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services, 370 P.3d 595

Infant Abel was taken into OCS custody after mother Moira, while apparently impaired by drugs, left him unattended in a car; Moira later admitted drug use and pleaded guilty to endangering a child and DUI.
OCS developed a case plan requiring substance abuse treatment, UAs, psychological evaluation, and supervised visitation; Moira initially engaged but relapsed, missed visits, and had continuing criminal/legal problems.
OCS changed Abel’s permanency goal to adoption and placed him with his paternal grandmother (Kayla) in Washington; Moira later moved to Oregon and had unstable contact information and limited phone access.
Moira filed a motion for a visitation review hearing alleging OCS effectively denied visitation; OCS responded by creating a family contact plan providing for brief calls and supervised visits set up in Washington.
The superior court denied the visitation-review motion because OCS had established a family contact plan and later, after a termination trial, found Moira failed to remedy substance-abuse-related risk, that OCS made reasonable reunification efforts (which were necessarily reduced after Moira moved), and terminated Moira’s parental rights.

Issue	Moira's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether superior court erred by denying a visitation-review hearing	OCS’s family contact plan was impractical given Moira’s limited phone access and lack of transportation; court should have held review to adjudicate denial	OCS had remedied the alleged denial by issuing a family contact plan that addressed the motion’s relief (phone and supervised visits)	Court did not abuse discretion: denial was proper because OCS had established a plan addressing the visitation complaint
Whether court improperly reduced OCS’s burden to make reasonable reunification efforts after Moira moved out of state	Court impermissibly credited OCS for reduced efforts and used Moira’s relocation against her without prior hearing	OCS’s efforts should be judged in light of case-specific facts; efforts may reasonably decrease when parent is unreachable	Court correctly evaluated OCS’s efforts under controlling precedents and found efforts reasonable given Moira’s inconsistent contact information and limited cooperation

Lara S. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 209 P.3d 120 (Alaska 2009) (standard for review-hearing abuse-of-discretion and visitation-review procedure)
Theresa L. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 353 P.3d 831 (Alaska 2015) (standards for reviewing CINA findings and legal questions de novo)
Sean B. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 251 P.3d 330 (Alaska 2011) (parental willingness to participate in services affects scope of OCS efforts)
Shirley M. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., 342 P.3d 1233 (Alaska 2015) (reasonableness of reunification efforts judged under totality of circumstances)
Vivian P. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Div. of Family & Youth Servs., 78 P.3d 703 (Alaska 2003) (court may excuse reasonable-efforts requirement at termination trial)
Rockstad v. Erikson, 113 P.3d 1215 (Alaska 2005) (standard for abuse of discretion review)