N.D. v. State
362 P.3d 1248
Utah2015Background
- K.C., born 2005, was removed from mother N.D.'s custody in Oct 2012 after findings of child's sexual abuse by the father and concerns about N.D.'s mental and physical health.
- DCFS prepared and the juvenile court approved a reunification service plan in March 2013; the plan documented N.D.'s serious mental illness (schizoaffective disorder) and vision problems and set objectives for reunification.
- N.D. did not invoke the ADA or request disability-based modifications during early hearings; DCFS provided multiple tailored accommodations and continued services for a period but later opposed further services as N.D. showed insubstantial progress.
- At the permanency/termination stage (late 2013), N.D. first raised the ADA as a defense, arguing DCFS failed to provide reasonable, disability-related reunification services and had not referred her to disability agencies.
- The juvenile court concluded the ADA did not apply to termination proceedings but alternatively found that no additional reasonable modifications were available and terminated parental rights; the mother appealed.
- The appellate court held the ADA applies to reunification services but affirmed the termination because the juvenile court reasonably found further modifications (notably additional time) would be unreasonable given the child’s best interests and the stage of proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | N.D.'s Argument | State/Guardian Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Title II ADA applies to reunification services/plans | ADA covers public services; reunification plan must be a service/program/activity | Termination proceedings focus on child welfare; ADA not a defense in termination | ADA applies to reunification services/plans provided by public entities |
| Whether ADA claims may be raised at termination hearing (timeliness) | May raise ADA/requests for modifications at termination stage | ADA claims must be brought earlier/separately; time-barred at eleventh hour | Not time-barred under Utah law; may be raised at termination hearing though lateness affects merits |
| Whether N.D. is a "qualified individual" entitled to reasonable modifications | With reasonable modifications she meets eligibility for reunification services | N.D. cannot perform essential parental functions; therefore not qualified | Qualification depends on whether reasonable modifications exist; cannot be dismissed solely as circular challenge |
| Whether additional/modified reunification services were reasonable here | Requested additional time and unspecified further accommodations under ADA | Court had already tailored plan; further adjustments (esp. more time) would harm child’s best interests | Juvenile court did not abuse discretion: additional modifications (more time) were not reasonable given record and child's need for permanency |
Key Cases Cited
- Manzanares v. Byington (In re Adoption of Baby B.), 308 P.3d 382 (Utah 2012) (standard of review for juvenile court mixed determinations)
- L.G. v. State (State ex rel. A.T.), 353 P.3d 131 (Utah 2015) (parent may raise DCFS failure to provide reasonable reunification services at termination hearing)
- A.O. v. State (State ex rel. K.F.), 201 P.3d 985 (Utah 2009) (juvenile court discretion on reasonable reunification efforts)
- Pa. Dep't of Corrs. v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206 (U.S. 1998) (ADA covers programs/services of a public entity)
- Adoption of Gregory, 747 N.E.2d 120 (Mass. 2001) (contrasting view that ADA not a defense in termination proceedings)
- Family Indep. Agency v. Richards (In re Terry), 610 N.W.2d 563 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000) (ADA requires reasonable accommodations in public agency reunification services)