 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re K.N.O.11/1/2005
.
In the present case, the trial court made the requisite N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(1) findings. In finding fifteen, the trial court used language substantially similar to the statutory language by finding that "it unlikely that either of the . . . children [would] be able to return to the home of either parent within six months." Additionally, findings of fact ten, eleven, twelve and the remainder of finding fifteen are relevant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(1) and explain the basis for the trial court's findings as follows. Finding ten states that "[respondent] had drunk alcoholic beverages as late as a week prior to the date of [respondent's] December 9, 2003 interview, . . ." and that "[respondent] did not verbalize understanding that her alcoholism had affected her ability to parent[.]" Finding eleven states that "[respondent] lost her driver's license due to an incident of driving while intoxicated in January of 2004 for which she was convicted in March of 2004." Finding twelve states that respondentfailed to take a requested drug test on 22 April 2004. Finally, finding fifteen states that "[respondent] not obtained effective treatment for her alcoholism." Moreover, finding fifteen states that neither respondent nor the children's father had "become able to provide a safe home for the . . . children eighteen months after the . . . children were removed from their possession." The trial court also complied with the requirements of N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(2) in finding of fact two when it found that " o relative placements [were] suitable."
The trial court further made sufficient findings pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(3) by specifically finding that " o barriers to adoption [were] known. Adoption, rather than legal guardianship or other statutorily allowed permanency plan, now the best permanency plan for the . . . children." Findings of fact 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15 are also relevant to the N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(3) criterion.
The trial court also complied with N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(4) through findings two, eight and fifteen. The trial court found that " he . . . children been in the same foster/adopt home since June 21, 2003, . . ." and that "K.N.O. doing well in her placement and very bonded to her foster parents." The trial court also found that " he . . . children's placement appropriate."
Finally, the trial court complied with N.C.G.S. § 7B- 907(b)(5), which requires the trial court to make findings regarding " hether the county department of social services hassince the initial permanency plan hearing made reasonable efforts to implement the permanent plan for the juvenile[.]" N.C.G.S. § 7B-907(b)(5). The phrase "reasonable efforts" is defined as follows:
The diligent use of preventive or reunification services by a department of social services when a juvenile's remaining at home or returning home is consistent with achieving a safe, permanent home for the juvenile within a reasonable period of time. If a court of competent jurisdiction determines that the juvenile is not to be returned home, then reasonable efforts means the diligent and timely use of permanency planning services by a department of social services to develop and implement a permanent plan for the juvenile.
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-101(18) (2003). The trial court initially adopted a concurrent permanent plan of reunification and adoption. Therefore, the trial court was required to make findings at the permanency review hearing as to whether DSS had made reasonable efforts to implement the plan. The trial court made sufficient findings regarding DSS's reasonable efforts through findings 7, 10, 11, 12, and 15. Finding seven relates to DSS's efforts to promote responde
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|