Colorado Supreme Court Hears Foster Parents’ Rights Case UPDATED

Specifically it is the right for a foster parent to intervene in child abuse cases.

The case in this article smacks of foster parent entitlement as it appears that they are suggesting that foster parents should have some right to be parties in the TPR. In this case, the foster parents wanted to adopt the child. The baby had a”total of eleven fractures in various stages of healing, including seven fractures to his ribs. The doctor determined that the fractures were consistent with child abuse, not accidents.

“This was one of the most egregious cases I’ve ever seen,” says attorney Tim Eirich of the Rocky Mountain Children’s Law Center. Eirich represented the foster parents in the court case resulting from the abuse. “First and foremost, the injuries to this child really made this egregious. But it was compounded by the department’s lack of response.”

“And it didn’t end there, Eirich says. Despite the alleged abuse, the boy’s parents were allowed overnight visitation with him while he was in foster care. However, the foster parents expressed concerns about those visits, noting that that the boy often came back to them dirty and thinner than when he left.

 

At the least, the boy’s biological parents struggled to comply with treatment plans set up by the department of human services. The plans required them to attend parenting classes, couples counseling and evaluations, and to find jobs and stable housing. But they often missed appointments, therapy and visits with the boy.

In addition, the boy’s mother sent a “barrage of harassing text messages” to the caseworker assigned to the case, including one that said, “We have done everything in the original treatment plan and then some, quit fucking around and fork (the boy) over.”

“In 2009, after the boy had been in foster care about a year, the department became aware of several incidents of domestic violence between his parents. A psychologist had diagnosed both with “significant psychological problems” and noted that their relationship appeared to involve “anger, tension and mistrust.” In one incident, the father grabbed the mother by the neck and said, “I want you to die.”

“After that, the boy’s guardian ad litem, an attorney appointed to represent his best interests, filed a court motion to suspend visits between the boy and his parents. On July 23, 2009, the boy’s foster parents intervened, emphasizing that they were concerned about the child’s safety and the fact that he’d been in foster care too long. A state law known as the “intervention statute” allows foster parents (or other relatives) who’ve had a child in their care for more than three months to intervene in court if they have “information or knowledge concerning the care and protection of the child.”

The motion to stop visitation eventually led to a motion to terminate the parents’ rights, making the boy eligible for adoption. The foster parents intervened in that case, too. At a hearing, Eirich, the foster parents’ attorney, cross-examined the witnesses. The boy’s father continued to offer excuses for his son’s injuries, including that the rib fractures were perhaps caused by swaddling. His mother, when asked about the broken bones, said, “That’s a toughy, right.” In February 2010, the court terminated the parents’ rights.

However, the parents and the Montezuma County Department of Human Services appealed the ruling, arguing that the foster parents’ participation in the termination hearing was improper. In a split opinion, the court of appeals agreed. It reversed the trial court’s ruling with regard to boy’s mother but not the boy’s father.”

“”The essence of what we’re saying is that the law supports foster parents participating in these hearings,” says Stephanie Villafuerte, the director of the Rocky Mountain Children’s Law Center. “We’re not saying that foster parents should adopt these kids or opine on whether a (biological) parent is a good parent or a bad parent. We just want foster parents to have access to the court to provide information.” [Well it sure sounds like they want to adopt the child and opine on the biological parents!]

Colorado Supreme Court to decide if foster parents can intervene in abuse hearings

[Westword Blog 6/6/12 by Melanie Asmar]

” That family eventually intervened in the court case to terminate the parents’ rights, offering information and cross-examining witnesses. On Thursday, the Colorado Supreme Court heard arguments about whether that intervention was proper.

 

Foster parents “have an ulterior motive,” said attorney Jon Kelly, who represents the  biological father of the boy, who’s now four years old. Attorneys for both biological parents and Montezuma County argued that allowing foster parents to become parties in a termination case sets up a custody battle.

“They are there to go after the parents,” attorney Tom Williamson, who represents the biological mother, said of foster parents. They do that by “dog-piling” the biological parents with questions meant to chip away at their credibility, he said, which isn’t fair.

In this case, the boy’s guardian ad litem, an attorney chosen to represent his best interests in court, filed the motion to terminate the parents’ rights after the parents repeatedly failed to keep the child safe. The foster parents intervened, which means they became parties to the case. State law says that foster parents or relatives who’ve had a child in their care for more than three months can intervene in court if they have “information or knowledge concerning the care and protection of the child.”

But the parties disagree on what “intervene” means. Attorneys for the county and the biological parents cede that foster parents should be allowed to offer information and testify about the child at hearings. But they don’t think foster parents should be allowed to hire their own attorneys and ask questions of other witnesses.

Chief Justice Michael Bender inquired if the foster parents’ attorney asked any questions that the guardian ad litem could not have asked, thereby influencing the outcome. No, Williamson said, but some of the questions they did ask were “repetitive.”

Tim Eirich, who represented the foster parents, says intervention isn’t about fighting over custody. He quoted the trial judge when he said, “The important thing is that we get a full disclosure of all of the facts.” Intervention helps make that possible, he argued.”

Foster parent rights: Abuse intervention focus in one of two cases before CO Supreme Court

[Westword Blog 6/8/12 by Melanie Asmar]

REFORM Puzzle Piece

 Having foster parents be parties in the TPR does not sound necessary if there is a GAL involved.

Update: Foster parents WILL get to be a party in the TPR! as long as they have cared for the child for a measly 3 months!

“According to the statute, foster parents can participate in hearings following a court decision that the child has been abused and neglected.

They must also have cared for the child for at least three months and have information concerning the care and protection of the child.

“We hope that it will give the courts insight to the parents that have been with them for the last 6 months, a year, or sometimes two years or more,” said Carrie Over, of Ariel Clinical Services. “They live with them 24/7, so I think their voices deserve to be heard.”

The ruling overturns a decision by the Colorado Court of Appeals that led to one Colorado mother gaining back the parental rights of her 2-year-old son. ”

Foster Parents Gain More Rights in Court

[KREX 2/26/13 by John Dias]