House Bill 1268-in the Best Interests of the Child
| Jurisdiction | Colorado,United States |
| Citation | Vol. 09 No. 1989 Pg. 1703 |
| Pages | 1703 |
| Publication year | 1989 |
1989, September, Pg. 1703. House Bill 1268-In the Best Interests of the Child
House Bill ("H.B.") 1268 was passed by the General Assembly during the 1989 legislative session and signed by the Governor on April 23, 1989.(fn1) This article discusses the important components of the bill and the problems it attempts to remedy. The article focuses on the practical impact of H.B. 1268 and offers suggestions to practitioners working within the social services system to help them understand the implications of the new legislation.
In a rural county, the Department of Social Services ("Department") recommended the removal of a three-and-a-half-year-old child from a foster home in which he had lived since birth to be placed with a different family. The foster home had provided excellent care, the child thrived and the permanent plan was adoption. It took the extraordinary efforts of dozens of people, including a legislator, county commissioner and child psychiatrist, as well as $20,000 in legal fees to stop the removal of this child from his permanent home. The child now has been adopted by his lifelong foster family. This case resulted in some new legislation, modifying the Children's Code.(fn2)
In another case, in a metropolitan county, the Department recommended the removal of a four-and-a-half-year-old black child from his lifelong white foster home in which he had thrived. Despite the excellent care this child received since birth, the Department believed that the foster family was not an appropriate adoptive family for him, based solely on their respective races. The case was appealed by the foster family. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded to the trial court to balance the child's best interests and to determine the least detrimental alternative available under the circumstances of this case.(fn3) Finally, in a third case, the Department threatened to remove a child from her lifelong foster home just to place her in a different foster home located closer to her natural father's home. The father had failed or refused to exercise any parental responsibilities since the child's birth three years before.
These are not isolated examples, but are characteristic of the social services system's lack of accommodation regarding a child's need for a permanent home. Such decisions are often based on bureaucratic policies, regulations, convenience or other concerns which do not address the best interests of a particular child. In two of the cases described above, the parents' rights already had been terminated. Theoretically, there were no competing interests. It is imperative that the "best interests" standard be implemented to prevent the infliction of emotional and psychological trauma on already abused or neglected children in state care.(fn4).
Once reunification with the biological
Shari F. Shink is an attorney and Executive Director of the Children's Legal Clinic, a non-profit United Way Agency devoted to advocacy for abused and neglected children. James W. Lauer, M.D., a psychiatrist, is Chief Medical Officer of the Cleo Wallace Center in Westminster.
When state intervention is necessary the entire system of intervention should be designed to promote a child's need for a continuous stable living environment. Thus, in light of this principle, we should be reluctant to remove children from homes where they have stable relationships.(fn6)
The Colorado legislature has mandated that judicial inquiry is to be focused on the best interests of the child.(fn7) However, often, a child's attachment to a caregiver is ignored or outweighed by other less significant concerns. Colorado case law does not clearly articulate standards or establish timelines to guide decision-making in implementing a permanent home environment for children in state care. The Children's Code does require a court review every six months,(fn8) but these reviews often recur for years with no finality and long after any hope for reunification with the biological parents. Instead, such children are moved through a revolving door of temporary placements. In day-to-day social work practice dealing with permanency planning, insufficient attention is paid to the developmental needs of children. As a result, some children spend from one-fourth to one-half of their childhoods without a permanent home.
A child's right to a permanent home or permanency planning for children has been the subject of numerous conferences, task forces, training institutes and federal and state training grants in Colorado for approximately the past ten years. In fact, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention awarded the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges ("NCJFCJ") $3 million to train judges and legislators across the country about such matters. This training was available for judges, lawyers and social services workers in Colorado in 1986 and 1988. Since 1986, the NCJFCJ has encouraged judicial initiatives in seeking permanent homes for children.(fn9)
Proposed amendments to the Colorado Children's Code several years ago addressed this lack of permanency in Colorado. The amendments required some form of judicial involvement in permanency planning fifteen months after out-of-home placement. That legislation failed. With the passage of H.B. 1268, perhaps now the courts will have the tools needed to achieve permanent homes for children in state care.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial