|
Article
Foster care is intended as a temporary placement for children
who must be removed from their families due to abuse or neglect.
Federal legislation mandates that child safety be of paramount
concern and that permanent placement decisions be made in a
timely manner. From the commencement of the court case, the
issues of safety, permanency and child well-being must be
addressed by the court.
Federal law (Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 known as
ASFA) requires that a permanency planning hearing be held within
12 months of a child’s placement in foster care. Permanency
goals established at this hearing may include the following:
- Family reunification
- Permanent placement with relatives
- Legal guardianship
- Adoption
- Long-term or permanent foster care
- Emancipation
- Independent living
- Another planned permanent living arrangement
The judge is in a unique position to provide the type of
leadership that ensures all federal and state legal requirements
are being met. From the day the child is placed in care, court
review hearings can be instrumental in monitoring that
reasonable efforts services for the child and family are in
place; that the child’s placement is safe and stable; that
appropriate family access occurs; that the parties are making
progress toward a permanency goal; and that alternative
placement plans (concurrent planning) are under consideration.
Judges find that scheduling review hearings more often than
required by statute can be effective in achieving timely
permanency.
Articles in this issue of The Judges’ Page address the
roles and perspectives of those involved in the court process.
Articles also feature court-based programs that exhibit
innovative practices to expedite permanency for children in
foster care. Paula Campbell of the National Council’s Permanency
Planning for Children Department shares online resources on the
topic.
Role and Perspectives of Court Participants in Achieving
Timely Permanency:
- Role of the Judge—Judge Leonard
Edwards (ret.) analyzes why dependency courts have been unable
to achieve timely permanency for foster children and shares
his suggestions for improvement.
- Role of the Child’s Attorney—Amanda
Donnelly of the National Association of Counsel for Children
explains the critical duties of the child's attorney, from
removal to development of a concurrent plan, and ultimately to
establishment and implementation of a permanency plan.
Proactive advocacy by the child's attorney is vital to
informing the court and parties of the child's wishes and best
interest.
- Role of the Child’s CASA/GAL
Volunteer—Sally Erny, Chief Program Officer of the
National CASA Association, shares the role and
responsibilities of the CASA/GAL volunteer in the court
process and highlights two programs that have established best
practices in advocating for timely permanency.
- Role of the Attorney for Parents—Mimi
Laver, Director of Legal Education at the ABA Center on
Children and the Law, addresses what it takes to achieve
effective legal representation for parents by sharing the ABA
Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing Parents in
Abuse and Neglect Cases. She provides helpful hints as to best
practices in implementing those standards.
- Role of Youth—Youth from
Elevate are educated to advocate for themselves as well as to
advocate for change within the foster care system. These youth
share their success in achieving change through the Iowa
legislative process and give us their perspectives on
permanency.
Court-Based Programs Implementing Innovative Practices to
Achieve Timely Permanency:
- Zero to Three Population—Judge
Douglas Johnson reminds readers that the basic principles set
forth in the NCJFCJ publications Resource Guidelines and
Adoption and Permanency Guidelines can be incorporated into
court practice in order to achieve timely permanency for
infants and toddlers.
-
Child Welfare Mediation and Decision-Making Programs—The
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) conducted
a survey and “Think Tank” involving all stakeholders in the
child welfare process. Many families, parents and children
have been offered an opportunity to effectively participate in
the child welfare decision-making process through mediation
programs.
Download the PDF of their report.
- Honolulu Model Court Program—The
Honolulu Family Court is one of the National Council of
Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ Victims Act Model Courts.
This court utilizes the ‘Ohana Family Conferencing program to
reduce the pattern of family separation and disconnection in
child welfare cases.
- Pima County Model Court Program—Pima
County, AZ is another NCJFCJ Victims Act Model Court. Pima
County Juvenile Court initiated a permanency pilot program
that established a collaborative process to evaluate the
barriers to permanency and address the needs of target
children.
- Tribal–State
Cross-Jurisdictional Hearings—Donna J. Goldsmith, Esq. and
Judge Korey Wahwassuck of the National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges ICWA-Tribal Court Committee describe a
best-practice model of shared jurisdiction between tribal and
state courts to achieve timely permanency for children
involved in ICWA cases.
|
Summary