Archives for dc child abuse and neglect lawyer

HEARSAY EXCEPTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEDICAL TREATMENT:

The recent Court of Appeals decision in IN RE. M.F. (No. 08-FS-733, Sept. 27, 2012), highlights how the litigation errors made at the trial level can tip the balance on the appeal. At issue, in part, was statements admitted by MF Fentress into record as admissible under the hearsay exception: statement made during medical diagnosis.  The evidence of abuse and neglect at trial was primarily elicited through the testimonies of a therapist, a treating medical professional and the social worker.  The bulk of testimony and evidence was the child’s account of events to these individual who all testified.  The litigants
Read More

DC COURT OF APPEALS EXPANDING AND REAFFIRMING FATHER’S RIGHT

The DC Court of Appeals in IN RE D.S., K.M., B.S., R.S., T.S. & P.S.; J.M., issued on September 20, 2012, reiterated the legal principles governing placement of children in the custody of their biological parents in a split neglect case.  Here the evidence established that the mother physically neglected the children and removal from her home was warranted, however, the court did not sufficiently consider the biological father and placement of the children with him rather than the shelter care — basis for the Court of Appeals reversal of the case.  The father was willing and able, had sufficient housing
Read More

DOES INTERSTATE COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN (ICPC) APPLY TO A NON-CUSTODIAL OUT OF STATE BIOLOGICAL PARENT?

Until recently, and almost consistently, the Child and Family Services Agency (CFSA) would in cases where a non-custodial non-petitioned biological parent intervenes in the neglect proceedings and seeks custody of the child – would require that parent to go through the rigorous and rather arduous task of the ICPC approval traditionally reserved for out of state placement with a foster family or an out of state pre-adoptive home. The Supreme Court of Connecticut in an opinion published on July 19, 2012 (IN RE EMONI W. ET AL), dissected the ICPC statutory language and clearly ruled that the biological non-custodial parents
Read More

WHAT IS THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF “IN LOCO PARENTIS”?

The DC Court of Appeals early on in Fuller v. Fuller, 247 A. 2d (1968) defined the term as a person who willingly puts himself in the role of legal parenting of a child, that is day to day care of the child such as: providing subsistence, food, shelter, medical care, etc – without going through the formalities of a court decreed legal relationship such as child custody, guardianship or adoption.  In short, assuming parental status and discharging the parental duties without legally being required to do so. Traditionally and often the grandparents who take over the parenting of a
Read More

DC ADOPTION PROCEEDINGS

In the District, Child and Family Services (“CFSA”) involved adoptions are both complicated in legal requirements as well as in procedural steps needed to reach finalization.  The legal process starts with filing of an adoption petition, which would generate show cause orders to be served on parents.  Upon service, the parents may either enter a written consent, or contest the proceedings. The adoption petitioner then in a contested proceedings has to prove by clear and convincing evidence that either the biological parents have abandoned or failed to provide financial support for the child for a period of six months preceding
Read More