Articles related to department of social services - Page 5 of 9

An attorney who represents a department of social services (DSS) in North Carolina faces a variety of unique ethical challenges when it comes to client representation. Who is the attorney’s client? How should the attorney report malfeasance within the agency? A number of factors make these determinations particularly challenging in North Carolina.

As the 2021 Legislative Session continues, many session laws that revised the abuse, neglect, dependency and termination of parental rights (TPR) statutes in the Juvenile Code (G.S. Chapter 7B) became […]

John was adjudicated incompetent in a court proceeding three years ago.  The court found that John lacked the capacity and needed the assistance of a guardian. At the time of the adjudication, John did not own any assets that required management by a guardian of the estate.  Therefore, the court appointed only a guardian of the person to assist John in making decisions related to his health care, housing, and other personal matters. Last year, John was entitled to receive a stimulus payment from the government. His guardian of the person is not authorized by law to negotiate the check and use the funds on his behalf.  Prior to October 1, 2021, the guardian of the person (or some other interested person) would have to go through a multi-step process to have the court appoint a guardian of the estate who could use the funds on John’s behalf.  This process may have included multiple court hearings and modifications of the guardianship to appoint and then discharge a guardian of the estate.  In addition to taking up time, it would create expenses for John in the form of court costs, a bond, and, in some cases, attorneys’ fees. Those expenses could ultimately be more costly than the amount that John was entitled to receive from the stimulus payment.

As of October 1st, there is an alternative path for John under the new North Carolina statute, G.S. 35A-1121. It authorizes the court to order a single protective arrangement or single transaction for the benefit of a minor or incompetent person where it is established in a proper proceeding that a basis exists for the appointment of a guardian for a minor or an incompetent person. G.S. 35A-1121(a). “Incompetent person” includes adults, emancipated minors, and minors age 17 ½ or older who are adjudicated incompetent. G.S. 35A-1202(11).  This post discusses some of the key features of G.S. 35A-1121, which was enacted as part of Session Law 2021-53.

As the 2021 Legislative Session continues, laws that revise the Juvenile Code are being enacted. The most recent session law is S.L. 2021-100, which amends various provisions of Subchapter I of Chapter 7B of the General Statutes – the laws that relate to abuse, neglect, dependency and termination of parental rights proceedings. This blog summarizes the amendments made by “An Act to Make Revisions to the Juvenile Code Pursuant to Recommendations by the Court Improvement Program.”

Earlier today, the Court of Appeals published In re K.M., an opinion that examines a trial court’s permanency planning order awarding supervised visitation between a mother and her child but temporarily suspending that visitation because of the COVID-19 pandemic. For more than a year, pandemic restrictions have been imposed by state and local orders as well as by decisions made by individual businesses and agencies. These restrictions have impacted some court orders of visitation between parents and children that were either in effect or entered during this period. Most often, the impact has resulted in the reduction of a parent’s time with their child – either by suspending in-person visits, converting in-person visits to electronic communication, or reducing the length or frequency of visits. Questions about the appropriateness of and/or authority to make those changes to visitation orders with or without court approval have been raised. Today’s appellate decision is the first opinion that discusses this issue. However, the basis for a temporary suspension of visits is not necessarily unique to the COVID-19 pandemic. This opinion may provide guidance for the suspension of visits generally.  

In August, the North Carolina Supreme Court published its first opinion addressing the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA): In re E.J.B., 375 N.C. 95 (2020). Specifically, the supreme court examined the history and purpose behind Congress’s enactment of ICWA and the notice requirements that apply when a trial court knows or has reason to know the child involved in the “child custody proceeding” is an “Indian child.”

What is ICWA? Why the quotation marks? What does the opinion say? How does the opinion impact practice?

How does elder abuse show up in your community? How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected how that abuse happens or how local professionals respond to it? A new opportunity to […]

The gravity of the events of recent weeks stemming from the highly publicized killings of several black citizens, including George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and Rayshard Brooks, has led for a call to acknowledge and respond to systemic racism in the United States. Initially, the focus was on the actions of the police, but the call to action has grown, asking Americans to address inequities based on race as a whole within our country. That begs the question, is race a factor in the child welfare system? The answer is yes.

These are not usual times for North Carolina, the U.S., or the world given the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In response to this pandemic, Chief Justice Beasley issued two Emergency Directives on Friday declaring that catastrophic conditions exist requiring changes to how the N.C. courts will operate. Yesterday, a clarifying memorandum was issued providing a “Coronavirus Update for Our Courts” (AOC Memo). These directives and other information may be accessed on the N.C. Judicial Branch website, which now has a page providing COVID-19 updates, here. This page also includes administrative orders issued by chief district court judges of judicial districts and how those individual districts are operating.

How does all this affect abuse, neglect, and/or dependency (A/N/D) court cases? A/N/D cases impact a parent’s paramount constitutional rights to care, custody, and control of their child. See Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000); Price v. Howard, 346 N.C. 68 (1997); In re R.R.N., 368 N.C. 167 (2015). Additionally, the Juvenile Code explicitly recognizes parents have constitutional rights that must be protected in these proceedings. G.S. 7B-100(1), -802. Emergency Directive 1 (paragraph 2) states that proceedings that are necessary to preserve the right to due process of law should continue to be held. Although the examples listed involve criminal proceedings, those examples do not exclude A/N/D actions where parents’ and children’s due process rights are affected.

My colleague, Margaret Henderson, and I are excited to announce a new SOG resource – Human Trafficking of Minors and Young Adults: What Local Governments Need to Know. Youth are particularly vulnerable to traffickers. County and municipal staff in many departments have either spontaneous or deliberate interactions with youth that provide opportunities to lessen those vulnerabilities, identify indicators of trafficking, and intervene when appropriate. Download the bulletin on the School of Government’s website, here.

This 36-page bulletin is organized into three parts.