Navigating the legal requirements applicable to adult protective services (APS) court proceedings can be challenging, given the expedited nature of the cases, the different types of orders the court may issue, and the varying legal standards and timelines that apply to each order. The urgent and often emergency-driven nature of APS cases adds further complexity to the process. That’s why we developed a new resource designed to assist county department of social services (DSS) directors, social workers, and attorneys—along with court officials and other professionals involved in APS —better understand the essential steps in a court proceeding to obtain an order for APS protective and emergency services.
Continue ReadingArchive
Tag: department of social services
-
-
A/N/D and TPR Cases: The Role of the Child’s Guardian ad Litem
In abuse, neglect, dependency (A/N/D) and termination of parental rights (TPR) proceedings, the child who is the subject of the action is a party. G.S. 7B-401.1(f); -601; -1104. In most actions, the child is represented by a guardian ad litem (GAL). See G.S. 7B-601; -1108(b)–(c). This post provides an overview of the rights and duties of the child’s GAL, which are addressed in statute and case law. Continue Reading
-
Big Changes Coming to North Carolina’s Child Fatality Prevention System
Tragically, 1,474 North Carolina children under the age of 18 died in 2022. According to the North Carolina Child Fatality Task Force’s 2024 Annual Report, the rate of child deaths in 2022 was 64.2 per 100,000 children—the highest rate recorded in the state since 2009. North Carolina will soon undergo a substantial restructuring of its statewide child fatality prevention system, including changes to how child fatalities and active child protective services cases are reviewed at the local level. The statutory changes to the system’s structure, many of which will become effective on July 1, 2025, were part of the 2023 Appropriations Act (S.L. 2023-134), as later amended by S.L. 2024-1 and S.L. 2024-57. The goal of these changes was to “eliminate the silos and redundancy that exist within the current system,” while also seeking to strengthen the system’s effectiveness in preventing child abuse, neglect, and death. Read on to learn more about the new system.
Continue Reading -
NC Supreme Court Opinion Clarifies and Changes Findings Required in A/N/D Orders
On December 13, 2024, the NC Supreme Court published In re L.L., an appeal of a permanency planning order (PPO) that awarded custody to a non-parent. In the PPO, the court awarded permanent custody to the child’s foster parents rather than the child’s maternal grandfather. In achieving this permanent plan, the court eliminated reunification with the child’s mother as a permanent plan. The issues for appeal focused on whether the trial court made the necessary statutory findings for placement with a non-relative and for eliminating reunification as a permanent plan. The Court of Appeals held the required findings were not made. See 291 N.C. App. 402 (2023) (unpublished). The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and addressed what findings are required for both non-relative placement and the elimination of reunification as a permanent plan. The answer may surprise you and will have an impact on court orders moving forward. Continue Reading
-
Initial Disposition and the Responsibility of DSS to Provide Reunification Efforts in A/N/D Cases
When children are removed from their home through a court order in an abuse, neglect, or dependency (A/N/D) action, a county department of social services (DSS) is required to provide reasonable efforts for reunification. See G.S. 7B-507(a)(2); 7B-903(a3). “Reasonable efforts” are defined in part as “[t]he diligent use of preventive or reunification services by a department of social services when a juvenile’s remaining at home or returning home is consistent with achieving a safe, permanent home for the juvenile within a reasonable period of time” G.S. 7B-101(18). “Return home or reunification” is defined as the “[p]lacement of the juvenile in the home of either parent or placement of the juvenile in the home of a guardian or custodian from whose home the child was removed by court order.” G.S. 7B-101(18c). This means reasonable efforts for reunification (sometimes referred to as “reunification efforts”) must occur for both parents and if there is a guardian or custodian from whom the child was removed, that guardian or custodian as well. However, the Juvenile Code (G.S. Chapter 7B) authorizes the court to relieve DSS of the obligation to provide reasonable efforts for reunification. When the court may enter such an order is limited to an initial dispositional hearing or a permanency planning hearing. The findings a court must make before relieving DSS of making reasonable efforts for reunification differs at initial disposition and permanency planning. Compare G.S. 7B-901(c) with 7B-906.2(b); see In re T.W., 250 N.C. App. 68 (2016). What is required at initial disposition? Our appellate courts have provided some guidance. Continue Reading
-
A Second Look at In re A.K., Addressing Cultural Issues in A/N/D Cases
The North Carolina Court of Appeals in In re A.K., ___ N.C. App. ____ (Aug. 6, 2024) addressed a parent’s right to be represented by a privately retained attorney of their choosing in an abuse, neglect, and dependency (A/N/D) action. See Timothy Heinle’s post discussing that issue here. The opinion also discusses issues related to the mother’s and child’s culture – their religion and language. This post explores those aspects of the opinion. Continue Reading
-
A Respondent Parent’s Right to Retain Counsel: Lessons from a New Court of Appeals Decision, In re A.K.
A recent decision by the North Carolina Court of Appeals considers the right of a respondent parent in a juvenile abuse, neglect, or dependency (AND) proceeding to hire counsel of their own choosing and what standards, if any, a retained attorney must meet to be allowed to represent a parent. In re A.K., __ N.C. App. __ (August 6, 2024). The case also includes discussion of the procedures for appointing a Rule 17 guardian ad litem to a respondent parent – an issue I will explore in a later post. This post focuses on what the opinion in A.K. does – and does not – tell us about a parent’s right to hire counsel. Continue Reading
-
Legislative Changes in Child Welfare: The Short Session
The North Carolina General Assembly made some changes to child welfare laws during this short session. Many of these changes have taken effect and some will be effective by January 1, 2025. All the amendments are important for those of you who practice in this area to be aware of. Continue Reading
-
Medical Appointments, Consents, and Children in DSS Custody
In North Carolina, a juvenile who is the subject of an abuse, neglect, or dependency petition may be placed in the custody of a Department of Social Services (DSS). When DSS has a court order of custody, it places a child outside of the child’s home, often in a licensed foster home or in the home of a relative or other placement provider. Here at the School of Government (SOG), we are often asked whether North Carolina law authorizes foster parents (or the child’s placement providers) to consent to health services for the children in DSS custody who are placed in providers’ homes. Spoiler: the answer is “no.” If foster parents or placement providers cannot consent to medical care for the children in their home, must the person whose consent is required (e.g., a DSS caseworker) attend and give consent at every appointment for every child who is in DSS custody? This blog post, co-authored by SOG faculty Kirsten Leloudis and Sara DePasquale, addresses these questions. Continue Reading
-
Guardians: Don’t Forget to File a Notice of Change of Address with the Court
Adult guardianship law in North Carolina underwent several significant changes effective January 1, 2024. My colleague, Timothy Heinle, and I previously blogged about two of these changes resulting from Session Law 2023-124, available here (notice of rights) and here (less restrictive alternatives). One change that may have slipped under your radar is found in G.S. 35A-1242(e) and imposes a new obligation on guardians to file a notice of change of address with the court.
Continue Reading