Archive

• Highlights of 2017 Legislative Changes Impacting Child Welfare Practice

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on July 19, 2017 at 6:00 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Since the initial publication of this post, the Governor signed H362. This post was amended on July 31, 2017 to reflect that change and reference the session law.

  The 2017 Legislative Session created and amended various statutes affecting child welfare. Some of those changes are effective now and others will become effective at later dates. This post highlights those amendments that directly impact practice in abuse, neglect, dependency, or termination of parental rights actions. A more complete summary of the numerous legislative changes can be found on the School of Government website, here.  Continue Reading

• Tick Tock: Mandatory Time Requirements to Enter A/N/D and TPR Orders

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on May 10, 2017 at 10:52 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Subchapter I of G.S. Chapter 7B (the Juvenile Code) governs child abuse, neglect, dependency, and termination of parental rights cases in North Carolina. The Juvenile Code “sets out a sequential process for abuse, neglect, or dependency cases, wherein each required action or event must occur within a prescribed amount of time after the preceding stage in the case.” In re T.R.P., 360 N.C. 588, 593 (2006). Included in the statutory time frames are the timing for entry of orders. What exactly does the Juvenile Code require? And, why does it matter? Continue Reading

• It’s Complicated: Venue vs Jurisdiction in A/N/D and TPR Actions

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on February 22, 2017 at 1:22 pm and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Within North Carolina, the appropriate location of a district court where an abuse neglect or dependency (A/N/D) action is filed is a matter of venue. GS 7B-400. And the appropriate location of the district court where a termination of parental rights (TPR) action is filed is a matter of jurisdiction. GS 7B-1101. Why are they different? Because the statutes governing A/N/D and TPR proceedings have different requirements and impose different limitations on the parties and the court.

  The General Assembly has the power to “fix and circumscribe the jurisdiction of the courts,” which can require certain procedures. In re T.R.P., 360 N.C. 588, 590 (2006). A/N/D and TPR cases are statutory in nature and set forth specific requirements that must be followed. Id. In an A/N/D or TPR action, the first place to look is the Juvenile Code (GS Chapter 7B) because it establishes both the procedures and substantive law for these types of juvenile proceedings. See GS 7B-100; -1100. Continue Reading

• Due Process Rights and Children: Fifty Years of In re Gault – Part Four, the Right to Confrontation

  This entry was contributed by LaToya Powell on November 2, 2016 at 11:15 am and is filed under Juvenile Justice.

  The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment provides that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” U.S. Const. amend. VI. This protection applies to state court criminal actions by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment. It also applies to juvenile proceedings because of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). Simply put, the right to confrontation allows juveniles to face their accusers in court and dispute their testimony through cross-examination. It allows juveniles to challenge the state’s evidence and protects them from the improper admission of certain testimonial hearsay under Crawford. This post explains a juvenile’s right to confront and cross examine witnesses and how far it extends in juvenile court.

  Continue Reading

• Due Process Rights and Children: Fifty Years of In re Gault – Part Three, the Right to Notice

  This entry was contributed by LaToya Powell on October 26, 2016 at 6:00 am and is filed under Juvenile Justice.

  The right to receive “notice” of a criminal charge or other alleged misconduct is considered to be one of the core requirements of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Although due process requirements vary depending on the circumstances, at a minimum, a person is entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before suffering a loss of life, liberty, or property by the government. In re D.B., 186 N.C. App. 556, 564 (2007). This basic protection was not afforded to juveniles prior to In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), which extended due process rights to children. Why is notice so important? When must notice be given? How much notice is required? These questions and others are answered in this third post in a series about Gault’s role in protecting the rights of juveniles in delinquency proceedings over the past fifty years.

  Continue Reading

• Due Process Rights and Children: Fifty Years of In re Gault – Part Two, the Right to Counsel

  This entry was contributed by LaToya Powell on September 14, 2016 at 10:17 am and is filed under Juvenile Justice.

  This post is the second in a series focused on In re Gault, the U.S. Supreme Court case which mandated that the core due process rights applicable to adults in criminal proceedings must also be afforded to juveniles who are alleged to be delinquent. Perhaps the most significant of these rights is the right to counsel.

  The Supreme Court strongly condemned the denial of counsel to children in a proceeding which carries “the awesome prospect of incarceration” until the age of majority. 387 U.S. 1, 36. In such proceedings, a juvenile needs legal representation “to cope with problems of law, to make skilled inquiry into the facts, to insist upon regularity of the proceedings, and to ascertain whether he has a defense and to prepare and submit it.” Id. Thus, in delinquency hearings “which may result in commitment to an institution in which the juvenile’s freedom is curtailed,” the child and his or her parents must be notified of the child’s right to counsel, or if they cannot afford counsel, that counsel will be appointed. Id. The NC Juvenile Code codified and expanded the right to counsel in G.S. 7B-2000 by requiring the appointment of counsel for all juveniles who are alleged to be delinquent without the need to show indigency. Despite this progress, advocates still question whether the right to counsel for juveniles extends far enough. Continue Reading

• Due Process Rights and Children: Fifty Years of In re Gault – Part One

  This entry was contributed by LaToya Powell on August 10, 2016 at 9:33 am and is filed under Juvenile Justice.

  On May 15, 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court granted due process rights to children in the landmark case of In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). The case involved 15-year-old Gerald Gault, who was taken into police custody without notice to his parents, held for four days, and committed to a juvenile facility for a maximum of six years for making a prank phone call to his neighbor. He received no prior notice of the charges and was adjudicated delinquent following an informal hearing with a judge without any witnesses or representation by counsel. His case would spark outrage today but was the norm for juvenile proceedings at the time. When the Supreme Court reversed Gault’s adjudication, it transformed the nature of juvenile court by defining basic requirements of due process that now apply to all delinquency hearings. These rights include:

  • the right to notice of the charges;
  • the right to an attorney;
  • the right to remain silent; and
  • the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses.

  While this decision marked a watershed moment in children’s rights, the language of the Court was not absolute. The Supreme Court did not extend these rights to all juveniles. Gault applies only to juveniles whose adjudication of delinquency may result in commitment to a state institution, which excludes undisciplined juveniles. The Court also limited its holding to the adjudicatory stage, leaving states open to define due process in other stages of juvenile proceedings (i.e., pre-adjudication, disposition, and post-disposition). Gault, 387 U.S. at 13. As a result, the decision did not completely change the legal landscape but left a legal patchwork among state jurisdictions that continues today. This post is the first in a series of posts that will discuss Gault’s impact on juvenile delinquency proceedings in NC and whether Gault’s promise of due process rights for children has been fully achieved.

  Continue Reading

• 2016 Legislative Changes Impacting Child Welfare

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on July 20, 2016 at 5:45 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  *This post was updated on August 1, 2016 to reflect the Session Law for H424.

  The 2016 Appropriations Act (S.L. 2016-94) addresses more than the State’s budget. Section 12.C makes substantive changes to the General Statutes in Chapter 7B that govern abuse, neglect, or dependency proceedings. The statutory amendments became effective on July 1st. In addition, S.L. 2016-115 (H424), creates a new criminal statute, “The Unlawful Transfer of Custody of a Minor Child,” and is effective for offenses committed on or after December 1, 2016. The law also amends the definition of a neglected juvenile in G.S. Chapter 7B.  Continue Reading

• New Book! Fathers and Paternity: Applying the Law in North Carolina Child Welfare Cases

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on June 17, 2016 at 5:00 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  This Sunday is Father’s Day, a day that celebrates fathers. It’s the perfect time to announce my new book, Fathers and Paternity: Applying the Law in North Carolina Child Welfare Cases. The book recognizes the role of fathers in abuse, neglect, or dependency cases.  Put simply, they have a role. Fathers are necessary parties to the court proceeding. See G.S. 7B-401.1(b). Fathers impact a child’s placement, visitation, and permanent plan.

  Unfortunately, every child does not have a father who has been identified by a marital presumption, acknowledgment, or judicial determination of paternity. Even when a father has been identified, his paternity has not necessarily been established, which allows for it to be challenged. The uncertainty in knowing who a child’s father may or may not be has resulted in cases where no father is named or the wrong man is named as a respondent father in the court action.  Continue Reading

• When Parental Discipline Goes Too Far, It’s Child Abuse

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on May 25, 2016 at 5:34 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Before On the Civil Side existed, the story about NFL running back, Adrian Peterson, pleading no contest to a misdemeanor reckless assault charge for disciplining his 4-year old son with a switch was national news. I wrote about what I thought would happen to him here in NC for our Criminal Law Blog: Parental Discipline: When Is It Abuse and/or a Crime? Since I wrote that post, the NC Court of Appeals published its first opinions interpreting the definition of abuse as applied to a child protective case that says:

  a child is abused when his or her parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker uses or allows to be used cruel or grossly inappropriate procedures or devices to modify the child’s behavior.

  G.S. 7B-101(1)c.

  In other words, a child is abused when parental discipline goes too far.  How does a court determine whether a parent has gone too far? Continue Reading

• What Is the Responsible Individual List and Why Is Someone on It?

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on April 27, 2016 at 1:57 pm and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  With April recognized as Child Abuse Prevention Month, it seemed fitting to write about North Carolina’s Responsible Individuals List (RIL). If you’re thinking “I’m a responsible person; I should be on that list,” you should know what makes a person a “responsible individual” for purposes of placement on the RIL. The definition is somewhat counterintuitive; a “responsible individual” is a parent, guardian, custodian or caretaker who has abused or seriously neglected a child. G.S. 7B-101(18a). If you are identified as a “responsible individual,” your name will be added to the statewide RIL, which is maintained by the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. G.S. 7B-311(b). Continue Reading

• Non-Parents’ Right to Counsel in Abuse, Neglect and Dependency Cases

  This entry was contributed by Austine Long on February 5, 2016 at 8:54 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Sara DePasquale wrote a blog on the Role of a Foster Parent in the A/N/D Court Action, which prompted me to explore the role of non-parents, and specifically their right to representation.

  Prior to the filing of an abuse, neglect and dependency (A/N/D) petition, the child may be in the care of grandparents, other relatives or friends. They are providing support and maintenance and making daily decisions about the health and welfare of the child. This may be more permanent substitute care compared to the temporary care provided by a foster parent.

  Once the petition is filed each parent named in the petition is appointed provisional counsel pursuant to G.S. 7B-602. But what about non-parents? The relative or friend who has custody of or is caring for the child may meet the statutory definition of “caretaker” or “custodian”. See G.S. 7B-101. Also, the child may have a court appointed guardian [G.S.7B-600; G.S. 35A-1202(7) & (10)] at the time the petition is filed. Does the caretaker, custodian or guardian have a right to court appointed counsel if they are indigent? Continue Reading

• Juvenile Emancipations

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on December 16, 2015 at 11:12 am and is filed under Juvenile Law.

  In North Carolina, a 16 or 17 year old who has resided in the same North Carolina county for six months may petition the district court for an emancipation from his or her parents, guardian, or custodian.  According to statistics from the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), there have been 986 emancipation filings between fiscal year 2007-2008 and 2014-2015, averaging over 120 cases a year.  Despite this number, there is a surprising lack of appellate decisions regarding juvenile emancipations. The lack of opinions has left both district courts and petitioners to figure out what the statutes require. Continue Reading

• Consenting to Medical Treatment for a Child Placed in the Custody of County Department Part I: Routine and Emergency Care and Evaluations in Exigent Circumstances

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on November 4, 2015 at 5:37 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Through S.L. 2015-136, “An Act to Make Various Changes to the Juvenile Laws Pertaining to Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency,” the General Assembly enacted G.S. 7B-505.1 and G.S. 7B-903.1(e).These two new statutes address medical decision-making authority for a child who is placed in a county department’s custody through an order entered in an abuse, neglect, and dependency action. These new laws apply to all abuse, neglect, and dependency actions that were pending on or filed after October 1, 2015. Continue Reading

• Children in Foster Care, “Normal Childhood Activities,” and the “Reasonable and Prudent Parent” Standard

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on October 16, 2015 at 7:09 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  On October 1, 2015, several new statutes affecting abuse, neglect, and dependency cases went into effect. Three new statutes specifically address decision-making standards related to social and cultural activities for children who are placed in a county department’s custody because of abuse, neglect, or dependency. The new statutes were created by S.L. 2015-135 and are

  • G.S. 131D-10.2A: Reasonable and Prudent Parent Standard,
  • G.S. 7B-903.1: Juvenile Placed in Custody of Department of Social Services, and
  • G.S. 48A-4: Certain Minors Competent to Contract.

  Continue Reading

• What Is the Role of a Foster Parent in the A/N/D Court Action?

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on September 30, 2015 at 5:53 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  A foster parent provides substitute care for a child who has been separated from his or her family because of abuse, neglect or dependency. G.S. 131D-10.2(9a);10A NCAC 70B.0101. When a  parent, relative, guardian, or custodian is unable to care for a child, a foster parent is a critical part of a county department’s plan for arranging for the child’s immediate and temporary safety. Foster parents are likely to have relevant information that will assist a court in determining what is in the child’s best interests. Foster parents may also be interested in adopting a child who has been placed in their care. Does a foster parent have a right to participate in the court proceeding?

  Continue Reading

• A/N/D, ICPC, and Out of State Parents: Say What?

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on September 25, 2015 at 6:14 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  If the juvenile court or county department intends to place a child in an abuse, neglect, and dependency (A/N/D) case with a parent who lives outside of North Carolina, does the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) apply? Continue Reading

• Who Is a “Caretaker” in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases?

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on September 2, 2015 at 5:36 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  This post was amended to reflect changes made to the definition of caretaker that occurred after the post was published by section 1 of S.L. 2015-123* (effective January 1, 2016) and Section 12C.1.(d). of S.L. 2016-94, effective July 1, 2016**  

  In North Carolina, abuse, neglect, and dependency cases determine the child’s status as abused, neglected, or dependent by examining the child’s circumstances rather than determining the fault or culpability of a parent. In re Montgomery, 311 N.C. 101 (1984). In determining a child’s status, social services agencies and trial courts must look at the statutory definitions of abuse, neglect, and dependency. G.S. 7B-101(1), (15), (9). These definitions require the social services agencies and courts to determine who created the child’s circumstances. In abuse and neglect cases, was it the child’s parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker? In dependency cases, was it the child’s parent, guardian, or custodian? If the child’s circumstances were not caused by a parent, guardian, custodian, or caretaker, the child is not abused, neglect, or dependent. A court order establishes the relationship of guardian [G.S. 7B-600; G.S. 35A-1202 & Article 6] or custodian [G.S. 7B-101(8)] to a child, but who is a caretaker? Continue Reading

• Mandated Reporting of Child Abuse, Neglect, or Dependency: What’s an Attorney To Do?

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on August 7, 2015 at 5:40 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  You are appointed to represent a juvenile in a delinquency proceeding. The petition alleges the juvenile assaulted his stepfather. When you meet with your client, he discloses that his stepfather has been beating him for years. This time, his stepfather went after his younger sister, and your client tried to protect her. In another case, you are hired to represent a father in a child custody action. Your client tells you that he just moved out of the home, where his baby and the baby’s mother live. He discloses that the mother has a drinking problem and frequently attacks him physically when she is intoxicated, sometimes while she is holding the baby. He also tells you that he has come home from work to find the baby is in dirty diapers and crying in the crib while the mother is passed out on the couch.

  Continue Reading

• Initial Removal of a Child from a Home Because of Suspected Abuse, Neglect, or Dependency, Amended G.S. 7B-504

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on June 24, 2015 at 5:58 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law.

  Spoiler Alert !! Effective June 2, 2015, amendments were made to G.S. 7B-504.

  Continue Reading

• One Potato, Two Potato: The Rules of Civil Procedure in A/N/D and TPR Proceedings

  This entry was contributed by Sara DePasquale on May 20, 2015 at 5:00 am and is filed under Child Welfare Law, Civil Law, Civil Practice.

  *This post was amended on January 29, 2016 to add Rule 45 (subpoena) and on February 22, 2017 to specifically reference Rule 12(b)(3)

  Have you ever felt like you’re playing a game of one potato, two potato when figuring out if a Rule of Civil Procedure applies to your abuse, neglect, dependency, or termination of parental rights action? Let me provide you with a guide instead. Continue Reading

• 2015 Pending Juvenile Justice Legislation

  This entry was contributed by LaToya Powell on April 15, 2015 at 5:00 am and is filed under Juvenile Justice.

  *** Note, since this blog post was published, the General Assembly enacted S.L. 2015-58, which replaces SB 331. For more information, see this blog post on juvenile code reform legislation.

  Subchapter II of the North Carolina Juvenile Code has seen few changes, since the Juvenile Code was rewritten in 1998. However, several bills are currently pending that suggest change may be coming. Some of these pending bills seek to clarify existing statutory procedures or create new procedures to provide guidance where the Juvenile Code is currently silent. However, two of the proposed changes are intended to reverse recent appellate court decisions interpreting the Juvenile Code. This list, although not exhaustive, describes pending bills that are likely to be of interest to juvenile court officials.

  Continue Reading