by Bob Collins
Sorry, aunts. You don't have any right to visit your nieces and nephews, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled this week in the case of a woman who wanted visitation rights with the daughter of her now-deceased twin sister.
The court ruled on the appeal of Kelli Rohmiller. After her sister and her boyfriend, Andrew Hart (the girl's father) split up, the girl and her mother lived with Rohmiller for five weeks. But when Ms. Rohmiller's sister died, Hart was awarded custody of the girl and cut Rohmiller off from visiting her niece.
A district court granted Rohmiller and her father unsupervised visitation with the girl, but the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, saying Minnesota law does not grant a right to visitation to aunts.
In Minnesota, the law grants visitation rights to grandparents and great-grandparents as well as people with whom a child has lived for at least two years if the parent of a child is deceased. But Supreme Court Justice Lori Gildea said neither provision applies in this case.
"If the legislature wanted to include aunts as a class of individuals who could petition for visitation, it could have," she wrote.
Rohmiller said it would be "absurd" for the legislature to exclude step-parents, step-grandparents, step-siblings, cousins and "significant others" from visitation simply because they had not lived with a child for two years because "there is no magic relationship that is formed after two years."
The Supreme Court rejected the argument. "We have not found any reported Minnesota cases in which, over a fit custodial parent's objection, visitation was awarded to a non-parent who was not standing in loco parentis (ed. note: had parenting functions) with the child," Gildea said.
Since the father allowed the girl's grandfather to visit her, the Court said its decision this week would not prevent Rohmiller from being present when he does.
Here's the full opinion.
Source http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2012/03/court_aunts_have_no_visitation.shtml
CPS corruption hurts and destroys families worldwide. Please use caution posting about CPS here or anyplace on the internet. For your protection, using your full, real name and precise location is not advised. CPS has eyes everywhere and CPS is notorious for taking what people say, twisting it, embellishing on it and then using it against them in CPS "investigations" and at court proceedings.
Showing posts with label Minnesota. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Minnesota. Show all posts
Friday, March 2, 2012
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Audit: Child-welfare checks uneven in Minnesota
Article by: JEREMY OLSON
Audit urges state to unify county and tribal standards in handling abuse and neglect allegations.
Minnesota's child welfare system needs stronger guidance to ensure that vulnerable children are treated consistently from one county to another, a legislative audit concluded Tuesday.
Testing county and tribal child-welfare agencies with 10 fictional cases of abuse and neglect, state auditors found wide variations in whether local officials deemed investigations necessary. It was a virtual 50-50 split, for example, on whether agencies would investigate a claim of a small child found wandering a block from home. And 64 percent said they wouldn't investigate as maltreatment a domestic abuse incident that occurred while a child was in another room.
Despite these so-called "gray area referrals," many of the state's child-welfare intake workers made reasonable and thoughtful deliberations, said Carrie Meyerhoff, the lead author of the report for the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor.
Child welfare advocates sought the audit because of wide regional variations in screening decisions -- and because Minnesota is unique, nationally, for the low rate of child abuse complaints that it "screens in" -- or flags -- for investigation or intervention. In 2010, Minnesota screened in a third of abuse complaints for further action; nationally, the figure was two-thirds, according to a federal Child Maltreatment report. Minnesota had the nation's third-lowest screen-in rate.
The report encouraged the Legislature to clarify the legal definition of "risk of harm," and urged the Department of Human Services to increase its training for evaluating and screening child maltreatment allegations.
Counties, for example, varied in whether they accepted anonymous child-welfare complaints, the auditors found. Meyerhoff said some county officials thought that the statute might prohibit anonymous reports. Erin Sullivan Sutton, an assistant commissioner with the state Department of Human Services, said the State Supreme Court has determined that anonymous reports are valid if they meet all other legal requirements.
The audit didn't address the question of teen neglect or abuse, but Rich Gehrman of Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota said counties are inherently more protective of young children.
"Once you are above a certain age, at least some counties are not going to screen you in no matter what the circumstance," he said.
'Small boats'
Minnesota is one of 11 states that empower counties to manage and help finance child-welfare services. One lawmaker at the hearing questioned whether decisions on abuse allegations would be standardized by creating a single state-run system. Neither Gehrman or Sullivan Sutton endorsed such an approach. Sullivan Sutton said the 11 county-run states have enacted some of the nation's most promising child-welfare reforms.
"It's sometimes easier to move 84 small boats," she said, referring to the number of child-welfare agencies in Minnesota, "than one large ship."
The report did not address why the state screens out more child abuse claims than most other states. Meyerhoff said unreliable data made such a comparison too difficult.
At least one observer said he thinks Minnesota might be doing things right. For example, said Richard Wexler of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, only 15 percent of the screened-in reports in Minnesota are turned away.
About 17 percent are substantiated, which means they become official child-welfare cases -- and kids can potentially be removed from their homes -- while another 65 percent receive alternative services to train parents and stabilize families.
"Minnesota caseworkers spend far less time spinning their wheels and more time actually providing help," Wexler said.
Source http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/wellness/139921823.html
Audit urges state to unify county and tribal standards in handling abuse and neglect allegations.
Minnesota's child welfare system needs stronger guidance to ensure that vulnerable children are treated consistently from one county to another, a legislative audit concluded Tuesday.
Testing county and tribal child-welfare agencies with 10 fictional cases of abuse and neglect, state auditors found wide variations in whether local officials deemed investigations necessary. It was a virtual 50-50 split, for example, on whether agencies would investigate a claim of a small child found wandering a block from home. And 64 percent said they wouldn't investigate as maltreatment a domestic abuse incident that occurred while a child was in another room.
Despite these so-called "gray area referrals," many of the state's child-welfare intake workers made reasonable and thoughtful deliberations, said Carrie Meyerhoff, the lead author of the report for the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor.
Child welfare advocates sought the audit because of wide regional variations in screening decisions -- and because Minnesota is unique, nationally, for the low rate of child abuse complaints that it "screens in" -- or flags -- for investigation or intervention. In 2010, Minnesota screened in a third of abuse complaints for further action; nationally, the figure was two-thirds, according to a federal Child Maltreatment report. Minnesota had the nation's third-lowest screen-in rate.
The report encouraged the Legislature to clarify the legal definition of "risk of harm," and urged the Department of Human Services to increase its training for evaluating and screening child maltreatment allegations.
Counties, for example, varied in whether they accepted anonymous child-welfare complaints, the auditors found. Meyerhoff said some county officials thought that the statute might prohibit anonymous reports. Erin Sullivan Sutton, an assistant commissioner with the state Department of Human Services, said the State Supreme Court has determined that anonymous reports are valid if they meet all other legal requirements.
The audit didn't address the question of teen neglect or abuse, but Rich Gehrman of Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota said counties are inherently more protective of young children.
"Once you are above a certain age, at least some counties are not going to screen you in no matter what the circumstance," he said.
'Small boats'
Minnesota is one of 11 states that empower counties to manage and help finance child-welfare services. One lawmaker at the hearing questioned whether decisions on abuse allegations would be standardized by creating a single state-run system. Neither Gehrman or Sullivan Sutton endorsed such an approach. Sullivan Sutton said the 11 county-run states have enacted some of the nation's most promising child-welfare reforms.
"It's sometimes easier to move 84 small boats," she said, referring to the number of child-welfare agencies in Minnesota, "than one large ship."
The report did not address why the state screens out more child abuse claims than most other states. Meyerhoff said unreliable data made such a comparison too difficult.
At least one observer said he thinks Minnesota might be doing things right. For example, said Richard Wexler of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, only 15 percent of the screened-in reports in Minnesota are turned away.
About 17 percent are substantiated, which means they become official child-welfare cases -- and kids can potentially be removed from their homes -- while another 65 percent receive alternative services to train parents and stabilize families.
"Minnesota caseworkers spend far less time spinning their wheels and more time actually providing help," Wexler said.
Source http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/wellness/139921823.html
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Lawsuit: Former deacon, prominent child welfare advocate accused of child sex abuse
by: Rose French
A Virginia man claims he was sexually abused nearly 40 years ago by a former deacon and prominent Minnesota child welfare advocate, according to his attorneys.
At a news conference on Tuesday in St. Paul, attorneys for the man who lived in St. Cloud as a child plan to announce a lawsuit against the Diocese of St. Cloud and Michael Weber.
The lawsuit, to be filed in Hennepin County District Court, addresses alleged sex abuse suffered when the man was 6 years old, while he vacationed with his family at a Minnesota lake, according to a statement from St. Paul attorney Jeff Anderson.
The victim, identified in the complaint as “John Doe HT," wishes to keep his identity confidential but will read a statement and answer questions by phone during the news conference.
It’s the first lawsuit to be filed against Weber, 67, since allegations emerged last month that he molested two boys around the same time he served as deacon at Church of the Holy Spirit in St. Cloud from 1969-70.
Two men, both of St. Cloud, were 11 years old at the time of the alleged abuse and reported the incidents to law enforcement authorities last month. Criminal charges are not likely because the statute of limitations has expired, authorities say.
Minneapolis attorney Francis Rondoni, who represents Weber, has said it’s “very difficult” for Weber to respond “to purported allegations that are more than 40 years old." Weber “has been a leader in the community here for many decades and has a spotless reputation. And this is very concerning to him.”
On Dec. 5, the St. Cloud diocese held a “listening session” at the church to air out the allegations and offer other potential abuse victims the opportunity to come forward.
Since the listening session was announced in mid-November, Weber has resigned from the board of the Greater Twin Cities United Way and stepped down from other prominent positions.
Four alleged victims attended the listening session (which was not open to the media) and recounted abuse by Weber, according to Jane Marrin, a spokeswoman for the diocese. A fifth purported victim was represented by someone else at the meeting and a sixth wrote a letter claiming abuse that was noted at the meeting.
Source http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/135469628.html
A Virginia man claims he was sexually abused nearly 40 years ago by a former deacon and prominent Minnesota child welfare advocate, according to his attorneys.
At a news conference on Tuesday in St. Paul, attorneys for the man who lived in St. Cloud as a child plan to announce a lawsuit against the Diocese of St. Cloud and Michael Weber.
The lawsuit, to be filed in Hennepin County District Court, addresses alleged sex abuse suffered when the man was 6 years old, while he vacationed with his family at a Minnesota lake, according to a statement from St. Paul attorney Jeff Anderson.
The victim, identified in the complaint as “John Doe HT," wishes to keep his identity confidential but will read a statement and answer questions by phone during the news conference.
It’s the first lawsuit to be filed against Weber, 67, since allegations emerged last month that he molested two boys around the same time he served as deacon at Church of the Holy Spirit in St. Cloud from 1969-70.
Two men, both of St. Cloud, were 11 years old at the time of the alleged abuse and reported the incidents to law enforcement authorities last month. Criminal charges are not likely because the statute of limitations has expired, authorities say.
Minneapolis attorney Francis Rondoni, who represents Weber, has said it’s “very difficult” for Weber to respond “to purported allegations that are more than 40 years old." Weber “has been a leader in the community here for many decades and has a spotless reputation. And this is very concerning to him.”
On Dec. 5, the St. Cloud diocese held a “listening session” at the church to air out the allegations and offer other potential abuse victims the opportunity to come forward.
Since the listening session was announced in mid-November, Weber has resigned from the board of the Greater Twin Cities United Way and stepped down from other prominent positions.
Four alleged victims attended the listening session (which was not open to the media) and recounted abuse by Weber, according to Jane Marrin, a spokeswoman for the diocese. A fifth purported victim was represented by someone else at the meeting and a sixth wrote a letter claiming abuse that was noted at the meeting.
Source http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/135469628.html
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Number of American Indian children in foster care worries tribal leaders - Minnesota
by Sasha Aslanian
St. Paul, Minn. — Each year about 1,500 American Indian children in Minnesota spend time in foster care or other out-of-home-care, often after allegations of neglect or substance abuse by a parent.
In Minnesota, American Indian children are 14 times more likely to be placed in out-of-home care than white children - the widest such gap in the nation. Officials place 66 percent of the children with relatives or with American Indian foster families.
Even as the total number of Minnesota children in foster care dropped 44 percent in the last decade, the number of American Indian children placed in foster care dropped by only 16 percent.
That worries tribal officials like Erma Vizenor, chairwoman of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. She said the tribes should be able to determine which of their families need intervention, and what kind.
"When we do not have the decision making and the authority and the control to determine what is best for them, it has become a major concern," Vizenor said.
Aiming to reduce the break-up of Indian families, the White Earth and the Leech Lake band of Ojibwe have taken over responsibility for child welfare on tribal lands. Now the White Earth, Minnesota's largest tribe, is now preparing to care for its children living hundreds of miles away in Hennepin County.
High poverty among American Indian families makes it more difficult to meet a child's basic needs, but that doesn't completely explain why Indian children are much more likely to be removed from their parents' care.
The tribes have questioned whether racial bias is a factor in such decisions, and they've worked with state officials to develop training for county workers to reduce bias in deciding which cases to investigate. The training also seeks to help outsiders understand the traditional role extended families play in raising Indian children.
Dawn Blanchard, the state's ombudsperson for American Indian Families, said removing American Indian children from their homes is "a daily reality."
Blanchard sorts cases into those she can solve over the phone, and those that require an investigation. She reports wide variation in how well counties follow a federal law designed to keep Indian children with other family members, or to at least place them with an Indian foster family.
Blanchard said the most common complaints she handles are disagreements between county social workers and tribes over where children should go.
"The tribe will say we want them to go to Aunt Betty and the county will say, 'we have problems with Aunt Betty. We think that she's not a good person,' " Blanchard said. "Maybe she's too old. 'We've heard' — that's a big one 'we've heard that she's drinking.' Is it substantiated? Do we know for sure if she has a history of drinking or was it 10 or 15 years ago and she's cleaned up her life now?"
Representatives of Minnesota's 11 tribes were so concerned that the needs of their children were not adequately addressed that late last year they sent letters to then-Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Gov.-elect Mark Dayton requesting immediate action to address the problem.
White Earth tribal officials want to take on responsibility for the tribe's children in Hennepin County, hundreds of miles south of the reservation. White Earth children make up a quarter of Hennepin County's American Indian caseload, or about 2 percent of the county's overall cases.
Margaret Thunder, a program manager for Hennepin County child protection, is enthusiastic about the tribe's effort.
"I think it's a huge deal," said Thunder, a member of the Red Lake band of Ojibwe. "They will have 100-percent say. Not that they don't already have a fair percent."
Tribes do have a seat at the table in child protection cases.
The 1978 federal Indian Child Welfare Act requires tribes be notified and involved in decision-making for their children. Hennepin County, with its large urban Indian population, has a high volume of these cases. The county gets high marks for complying with the act, and that's one of the reasons White Earth officials believe addressing the needs of the tribe's children there is a next logical step.
Transferring such cases to the tribe would give it complete control over American Indian cases such as a recent one heard in juvenile court.
Four children, ages 4, 2, 1 and one month, were placed in emergency foster care following reports that their parents were abusing drugs and neglecting the children. The parents didn't show up for the court hearing. Their father is a member of the White Earth band and their mother is enrolled in the Ho-Chunk Nation in Wisconsin.
"Her current address is technically St. Joseph's hospital where the treatment center was," said Mike Hogan, a courtroom monitor for the Minneapolis American Indian Center. "No one's quite sure where she is, even her attorney."
A Ho-Chunk attorney who joined the hearing by speaker phone said the tribe would prepare a list of relatives who could care for the children. White Earth officials agreed to let the mother's tribe take the lead, but they agreed to compile a list of paternal relatives.
A guardian ad litem said the children were doing well under the care of their foster care families.
Hogan's boss, Sheri Riemers, said the embrace of extended families offers the most hopeful outcome for children in such tough situations.
"We do believe when children are removed that their spirit is left behind," said Riemers, program director of Indian Child Welfare for the Minneapolis American Indian Center.
Other tribes around the state and around the country are watching closely.
Erin Sullivan Sutton, assistant commissioner of the state Department of Human Services, said she is not aware of another state transferring public child welfare from a state or county to a tribal system. But there are good reasons to do so, said Sutton, the state's point person on child welfare.
"We're thinking that if services can be provided in a cultural context to Indian families and by tribal agencies that there may be more success," she said.
For state and tribal officials success won't mean eliminating out-of-home placements. There will always be children who need to be removed from unsafe situations, but they hope more tribal involvement will reduce the disparate treatment of American Indian children.
Vizenor said the Hennepin County program could be the beginning of an ambitious venture to expand care for children living off the reservation.
"Without a doubt, I know we will be successful and gradually, we will phase in the metro area and eventually all our children in the state of Minnesota," she said.
White Earth and the state will present a report to the legislature in January. The timeline for the Hennepin County transfer, and the costs, are still to be determined.
Source http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/11/30/american-indian-children-foster-care/
St. Paul, Minn. — Each year about 1,500 American Indian children in Minnesota spend time in foster care or other out-of-home-care, often after allegations of neglect or substance abuse by a parent.
In Minnesota, American Indian children are 14 times more likely to be placed in out-of-home care than white children - the widest such gap in the nation. Officials place 66 percent of the children with relatives or with American Indian foster families.
Even as the total number of Minnesota children in foster care dropped 44 percent in the last decade, the number of American Indian children placed in foster care dropped by only 16 percent.
That worries tribal officials like Erma Vizenor, chairwoman of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. She said the tribes should be able to determine which of their families need intervention, and what kind.
"When we do not have the decision making and the authority and the control to determine what is best for them, it has become a major concern," Vizenor said.
Aiming to reduce the break-up of Indian families, the White Earth and the Leech Lake band of Ojibwe have taken over responsibility for child welfare on tribal lands. Now the White Earth, Minnesota's largest tribe, is now preparing to care for its children living hundreds of miles away in Hennepin County.
High poverty among American Indian families makes it more difficult to meet a child's basic needs, but that doesn't completely explain why Indian children are much more likely to be removed from their parents' care.
The tribes have questioned whether racial bias is a factor in such decisions, and they've worked with state officials to develop training for county workers to reduce bias in deciding which cases to investigate. The training also seeks to help outsiders understand the traditional role extended families play in raising Indian children.
Dawn Blanchard, the state's ombudsperson for American Indian Families, said removing American Indian children from their homes is "a daily reality."
Blanchard sorts cases into those she can solve over the phone, and those that require an investigation. She reports wide variation in how well counties follow a federal law designed to keep Indian children with other family members, or to at least place them with an Indian foster family.
Blanchard said the most common complaints she handles are disagreements between county social workers and tribes over where children should go.
"The tribe will say we want them to go to Aunt Betty and the county will say, 'we have problems with Aunt Betty. We think that she's not a good person,' " Blanchard said. "Maybe she's too old. 'We've heard' — that's a big one 'we've heard that she's drinking.' Is it substantiated? Do we know for sure if she has a history of drinking or was it 10 or 15 years ago and she's cleaned up her life now?"
Representatives of Minnesota's 11 tribes were so concerned that the needs of their children were not adequately addressed that late last year they sent letters to then-Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Gov.-elect Mark Dayton requesting immediate action to address the problem.
White Earth tribal officials want to take on responsibility for the tribe's children in Hennepin County, hundreds of miles south of the reservation. White Earth children make up a quarter of Hennepin County's American Indian caseload, or about 2 percent of the county's overall cases.
Margaret Thunder, a program manager for Hennepin County child protection, is enthusiastic about the tribe's effort.
"I think it's a huge deal," said Thunder, a member of the Red Lake band of Ojibwe. "They will have 100-percent say. Not that they don't already have a fair percent."
Tribes do have a seat at the table in child protection cases.
The 1978 federal Indian Child Welfare Act requires tribes be notified and involved in decision-making for their children. Hennepin County, with its large urban Indian population, has a high volume of these cases. The county gets high marks for complying with the act, and that's one of the reasons White Earth officials believe addressing the needs of the tribe's children there is a next logical step.
Transferring such cases to the tribe would give it complete control over American Indian cases such as a recent one heard in juvenile court.
Four children, ages 4, 2, 1 and one month, were placed in emergency foster care following reports that their parents were abusing drugs and neglecting the children. The parents didn't show up for the court hearing. Their father is a member of the White Earth band and their mother is enrolled in the Ho-Chunk Nation in Wisconsin.
"Her current address is technically St. Joseph's hospital where the treatment center was," said Mike Hogan, a courtroom monitor for the Minneapolis American Indian Center. "No one's quite sure where she is, even her attorney."
A Ho-Chunk attorney who joined the hearing by speaker phone said the tribe would prepare a list of relatives who could care for the children. White Earth officials agreed to let the mother's tribe take the lead, but they agreed to compile a list of paternal relatives.
A guardian ad litem said the children were doing well under the care of their foster care families.
Hogan's boss, Sheri Riemers, said the embrace of extended families offers the most hopeful outcome for children in such tough situations.
"We do believe when children are removed that their spirit is left behind," said Riemers, program director of Indian Child Welfare for the Minneapolis American Indian Center.
Other tribes around the state and around the country are watching closely.
Erin Sullivan Sutton, assistant commissioner of the state Department of Human Services, said she is not aware of another state transferring public child welfare from a state or county to a tribal system. But there are good reasons to do so, said Sutton, the state's point person on child welfare.
"We're thinking that if services can be provided in a cultural context to Indian families and by tribal agencies that there may be more success," she said.
For state and tribal officials success won't mean eliminating out-of-home placements. There will always be children who need to be removed from unsafe situations, but they hope more tribal involvement will reduce the disparate treatment of American Indian children.
Vizenor said the Hennepin County program could be the beginning of an ambitious venture to expand care for children living off the reservation.
"Without a doubt, I know we will be successful and gradually, we will phase in the metro area and eventually all our children in the state of Minnesota," she said.
White Earth and the state will present a report to the legislature in January. The timeline for the Hennepin County transfer, and the costs, are still to be determined.
Source http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/11/30/american-indian-children-foster-care/
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Minnesota - High court: State, not tribe, must preside over adoption
Decision reverses two earlier orders favoring White Earth Band of Ojibwe. Parents' rights had been terminated.
Article by: ABBY SIMONS, Star Tribune
Updated: October 26, 2011 - 9:27 PM
Adoption proceedings for an Indian child whose parents' rights were terminated must take place within state courts, not tribal courts, the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered Wednesday.
In the 4-2 decision, the court reversed two earlier orders granting the White Earth Band of Ojibwe permission to handle the child's adoption within its tribal court.
In its order, the Supreme Court reasoned that under the Indian Child Welfare Act, tribal authority is limited to foster care placement and termination of parental rights -- not adoptive placement.
The child in question, identified in court documents as L.S., is an enrolled member of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. The mother is white, and the couple's five older children have all been removed from parental care or have had their parental rights terminated. According to documents, neither parent lived on the White Earth Reservation.
After parental rights were terminated, a Fillmore County judge granted the White Earth Band of Ojibwe permission to transfer pre-adoption proceedings to its tribal court under the rules of the Indian Child Welfare Act. A guardian ad litem for the child objected, but the Court of Appeals upheld the ruling in favor of the tribe.
In its reversal, the Supreme Court said there is no language in the federal law granting tribes jurisdiction over adoptive placement proceedings for children not living on the reservation. Because the language in the law was ambiguous, the court reasoned that adoptive proceedings should be excluded, not included.
The court also reasoned that the White Earth tribal court also lacked jurisdiction over the termination of parental rights because the mother was not a member of the tribe and the child did not live on the reservation.
The case will now return to Fillmore County District Court, where a guardian ad litem will be re-appointed and pre-adoptive placement will take place under state jurisdiction.
In his dissent, Justice Paul H. Anderson wrote that there is no language in the law that prevents transfer of pre-adoptive and adoptive placement proceedings to a tribal court in cases involving Indian children who do not live on or are not from their tribe's reservation. In light of the law, which is meant to favor tribes, the omission should instead be interpreted as granting the tribe permission to preside over the child's adoption.
Source http://m.startribune.com/local/?id=132640213
Article by: ABBY SIMONS, Star Tribune
Updated: October 26, 2011 - 9:27 PM
Adoption proceedings for an Indian child whose parents' rights were terminated must take place within state courts, not tribal courts, the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered Wednesday.
In the 4-2 decision, the court reversed two earlier orders granting the White Earth Band of Ojibwe permission to handle the child's adoption within its tribal court.
In its order, the Supreme Court reasoned that under the Indian Child Welfare Act, tribal authority is limited to foster care placement and termination of parental rights -- not adoptive placement.
The child in question, identified in court documents as L.S., is an enrolled member of the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. The mother is white, and the couple's five older children have all been removed from parental care or have had their parental rights terminated. According to documents, neither parent lived on the White Earth Reservation.
After parental rights were terminated, a Fillmore County judge granted the White Earth Band of Ojibwe permission to transfer pre-adoption proceedings to its tribal court under the rules of the Indian Child Welfare Act. A guardian ad litem for the child objected, but the Court of Appeals upheld the ruling in favor of the tribe.
In its reversal, the Supreme Court said there is no language in the federal law granting tribes jurisdiction over adoptive placement proceedings for children not living on the reservation. Because the language in the law was ambiguous, the court reasoned that adoptive proceedings should be excluded, not included.
The court also reasoned that the White Earth tribal court also lacked jurisdiction over the termination of parental rights because the mother was not a member of the tribe and the child did not live on the reservation.
The case will now return to Fillmore County District Court, where a guardian ad litem will be re-appointed and pre-adoptive placement will take place under state jurisdiction.
In his dissent, Justice Paul H. Anderson wrote that there is no language in the law that prevents transfer of pre-adoptive and adoptive placement proceedings to a tribal court in cases involving Indian children who do not live on or are not from their tribe's reservation. In light of the law, which is meant to favor tribes, the omission should instead be interpreted as granting the tribe permission to preside over the child's adoption.
Source http://m.startribune.com/local/?id=132640213
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Caught in the middle of Rice County child protection case
Posted at 3:34 PM on September 6, 2011 by Bob Collins
A heartbreaking case in Rice County is a compelling example of how a child can get caught in a tug-of-war in the child protection system in Minnesota.
Today, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that a juvenile court and the county coerced parents of a child apparently in need of mental health treatment to admit that the need for intervention "are (is) due to deficiencies in their parenting."
The story starts in November 2010 when the teenager ran away from home. Police brought him home but the police officer thought he'd be at risk there, so he was placed on a 72-hour emergency "hold." Rice County, through a social worker, petitioned the juvenile court to determine that he was a child in need of protection or services (CHIPS).
At a hearing last winter, a juvenile court judge told the parents, "If you want to admit that your son has special care needs and you're unable to provide those, that is not saying that you're not a good parent. That's saying (the child) has special care need and you're not ... the Mayo Clinic and you're not a psychiatrist ..."
"I am a damn good mother," the woman insisted.
The parents admitted to the petition for services, believing their son would be placed at Gerard Academy, a residential treatment facility, at county expense. Instead, their child was put in foster care. The county, according to the Appeals Court, then claimed the placement "was necessary to keep him safe from his parents."
The parents tried to withdraw their petition, but a court refused.
In a decision today, Appeals Court Judge Terri J. Stoneburner suggested the county was threatening to withhold any services unless the parents admitted to the petition, writing that "a threat to act in a manner that is not in a child's best interests constitutes a manifest injustice" in ordering the decision overturned.
In a dissent, however, Appeals Court Judge Heidi S. Schellhas said the father of the child had been charged with physical abuse and that the parents had previously told Rice County "they did not want him back in their home." And that the teen didn't want to return home after running away because he was afraid of punishment.
She said the juvenile court was clear that the parents would not be able to dictate the services their child would get once they signed the paperwork, and that the parents were free to place their child in a treatment program of their choice at their own expense instead.
"The district court considered all of the parents' argument in connection with their motions to withdraw their admission, and, in my opinion, properly rejected their arguments and denied their motions," she said.
The case settles who won the right to withdraw the petition for services. What it doesn't clear up is what happens to the teenager caught in the middle. I've placed calls to his public defender for clarification.
Click Here To Read The Opinion
Source http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2011/09/caught_in_the_middle_of_rice_c.shtml
A heartbreaking case in Rice County is a compelling example of how a child can get caught in a tug-of-war in the child protection system in Minnesota.
Today, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that a juvenile court and the county coerced parents of a child apparently in need of mental health treatment to admit that the need for intervention "are (is) due to deficiencies in their parenting."
The story starts in November 2010 when the teenager ran away from home. Police brought him home but the police officer thought he'd be at risk there, so he was placed on a 72-hour emergency "hold." Rice County, through a social worker, petitioned the juvenile court to determine that he was a child in need of protection or services (CHIPS).
At a hearing last winter, a juvenile court judge told the parents, "If you want to admit that your son has special care needs and you're unable to provide those, that is not saying that you're not a good parent. That's saying (the child) has special care need and you're not ... the Mayo Clinic and you're not a psychiatrist ..."
"I am a damn good mother," the woman insisted.
The parents admitted to the petition for services, believing their son would be placed at Gerard Academy, a residential treatment facility, at county expense. Instead, their child was put in foster care. The county, according to the Appeals Court, then claimed the placement "was necessary to keep him safe from his parents."
The parents tried to withdraw their petition, but a court refused.
In a decision today, Appeals Court Judge Terri J. Stoneburner suggested the county was threatening to withhold any services unless the parents admitted to the petition, writing that "a threat to act in a manner that is not in a child's best interests constitutes a manifest injustice" in ordering the decision overturned.
In a dissent, however, Appeals Court Judge Heidi S. Schellhas said the father of the child had been charged with physical abuse and that the parents had previously told Rice County "they did not want him back in their home." And that the teen didn't want to return home after running away because he was afraid of punishment.
She said the juvenile court was clear that the parents would not be able to dictate the services their child would get once they signed the paperwork, and that the parents were free to place their child in a treatment program of their choice at their own expense instead.
"The district court considered all of the parents' argument in connection with their motions to withdraw their admission, and, in my opinion, properly rejected their arguments and denied their motions," she said.
The case settles who won the right to withdraw the petition for services. What it doesn't clear up is what happens to the teenager caught in the middle. I've placed calls to his public defender for clarification.
Click Here To Read The Opinion
Source http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2011/09/caught_in_the_middle_of_rice_c.shtml
Friday, July 29, 2011
County Seeks Help With Unfunded State Mandate
Thursday, July 28, 2011 7:01 am
by Peter Bodley
Managing Editor
Anoka County is hoping a federal grant will help pay the cost of an unfunded state mandate.
The Anoka County Board has authorized the submission of a federal grant application in an amount of $500,000 to improve service delivery in the child welfare system.
The grant, if successful, would be for five years, $100,000 each year, from Oct. 1, 2011 through Sept. 30, 2016.
In 2010 the Minnesota Legislature extended the time that foster children could remain in the system from 18 to 21 years old.
The legislative action also allowed foster children who left the system at 18 to return to foster care until they were 21 if they were unable to make it on their own.
According to Cindy Cesare, county manager for family and child services, the new law went into effect July 1, 2010, but the Legislature did not authorize any money to pay for it, leaving it up to the counties to fund.
Before the new law went into effect, Anoka County on occasion would continue foster care for teens until they reached the age of 19, Cesare said.
While the teens are in foster care, they are offered services paid for by the county to get them ready to live independently.
This includes monthly visits by a social worker, therapy where needed and teaching the teens independent living skills, Cesare said.
If approved, the federal grant would enable the county to enhance those services, according to Cesare.
A portion of the grant would go to the Emma B. Howe YMCA, Coon Rapids, for its youth transition services program, Cesare said.
“The money would allow YMCA to work with more youth through its transitional services,” she said.
If the federal money is received, the county human services division would also partner with the Anoka County Job Training Center to provide job training and counseling for 18- to 21-year-olds, as well as helping them in job searches, Cesare said.
Cesare anticipates hearing the fate of the county’s grant application later this summer, she said.
According to Bill Pinsonnault, county social services and mental health director, the grant money would enable the county to work with these young adults so that they can be successful living independently and don’t have to come back into the system.
In tandem with the grant application authorization, the county board also approved an amendment to the contract it has with the Emma B. Howe YMCA to increase the amount from $45,000 to $47,000 for youth transition services, effective May 1 through April 30, 2012.
SOURCE: http://abcnewspapers.com/2011/07/28/county-seeks-help-with-unfunded-state-mandate/
by Peter Bodley
Managing Editor
Anoka County is hoping a federal grant will help pay the cost of an unfunded state mandate.
The Anoka County Board has authorized the submission of a federal grant application in an amount of $500,000 to improve service delivery in the child welfare system.
The grant, if successful, would be for five years, $100,000 each year, from Oct. 1, 2011 through Sept. 30, 2016.
In 2010 the Minnesota Legislature extended the time that foster children could remain in the system from 18 to 21 years old.
The legislative action also allowed foster children who left the system at 18 to return to foster care until they were 21 if they were unable to make it on their own.
According to Cindy Cesare, county manager for family and child services, the new law went into effect July 1, 2010, but the Legislature did not authorize any money to pay for it, leaving it up to the counties to fund.
Before the new law went into effect, Anoka County on occasion would continue foster care for teens until they reached the age of 19, Cesare said.
While the teens are in foster care, they are offered services paid for by the county to get them ready to live independently.
This includes monthly visits by a social worker, therapy where needed and teaching the teens independent living skills, Cesare said.
If approved, the federal grant would enable the county to enhance those services, according to Cesare.
A portion of the grant would go to the Emma B. Howe YMCA, Coon Rapids, for its youth transition services program, Cesare said.
“The money would allow YMCA to work with more youth through its transitional services,” she said.
If the federal money is received, the county human services division would also partner with the Anoka County Job Training Center to provide job training and counseling for 18- to 21-year-olds, as well as helping them in job searches, Cesare said.
Cesare anticipates hearing the fate of the county’s grant application later this summer, she said.
According to Bill Pinsonnault, county social services and mental health director, the grant money would enable the county to work with these young adults so that they can be successful living independently and don’t have to come back into the system.
In tandem with the grant application authorization, the county board also approved an amendment to the contract it has with the Emma B. Howe YMCA to increase the amount from $45,000 to $47,000 for youth transition services, effective May 1 through April 30, 2012.
SOURCE: http://abcnewspapers.com/2011/07/28/county-seeks-help-with-unfunded-state-mandate/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)