The following two tabs change content below.
Chris Leone-Zwillinger
Latest posts by Chris Leone-Zwillinger (see all)
- New Jersey Divorce Causes of Action - December 18, 2013
- A Brief History of Divorce and Alimony - December 16, 2013
- Time is of the Essence in DCPP Matters - November 22, 2013
Parents Cannot Afford to Wait to Act When the State Step In
![Policeman and child](https://kbf04e.p3cdn1.secureserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Policeman-and-child-300x201.jpg)
(1) The child’s safety, health or development has been or will continue to be endangered by the parental relationship; (2) The parent is unwilling or unable to eliminate the harm facing the child or is unable or unwilling to provide a safe and stable home for the child and the delay of permanent placement will add to the harm. Such harm may include evidence that separating the child from his resource family parents would cause serious and enduring emotional or psychological harm to the child; (3) The [D]ivision has made reasonable efforts to provide services to help the parent correct the circumstances which led to the child’s placement outside the home and the court has considered alternatives to termination of parental rights; and (4) Termination of parental rights will not do more harm than good. [N.J.S.A. 30:4C–15.1(a); see also N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. A.W., 103 N.J. 591, 604–11, 512 A.2d 438 (1986) (reciting the four controlling standards later codified in Title 30).]Recently, the appellate division reaffirmed these principals. (See New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services v. J.S., Defendant–Appellant. In the Matter of the Guardianship of A.G., a minor; JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. J.S., Defendant–Appellant. IN RE: the Guardianship of A.G., a minor. — October 17, 2013) (AG)):
AG examines the second element and acknowledges the potential harm to a child if they are removed from a loving home where they have formed strong bonds. In AG, the appellate division up held the trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights and leave a child in the home of the foster parents because there was expert testimony by Dr Kanen that [A.G.] has made significant improvements over time and that there was a high risk of losing developmental progress if [A.G.] were to be removed from his foster home. Dr. Kanen further testified that [A.G.] would be very traumatized and at risk for depression if separated from his resource parents. He has grown and more importantly thrived under the care of his foster parents. He regards this couple as his parents.AG reinforces the notion that what takes place at the one year mark is primarily determined in the very early stages of the litigation. If there are potential caregivers within the family, they must be identified quickly and the DCPP must consider them for placement. Because AG demonstrates that once the child has established bonds with the foster parents, it is unlikely that the last minute discovery of relatives will make a difference. If you or a loved one is struggling to deal with the consequences of a DCPP/DYFS investigation, then please contact the family law lawyers at DeMichele & DeMichele today. We can help you navigate the process, explain your rights and work towards the best result for your children. Contact us now for your confidential initial consultation. You can also reach us by telephone (856) 546-1350.
The following two tabs change content below.
Chris Leone-Zwillinger
Latest posts by Chris Leone-Zwillinger (see all)
- New Jersey Divorce Causes of Action - December 18, 2013
- A Brief History of Divorce and Alimony - December 16, 2013
- Time is of the Essence in DCPP Matters - November 22, 2013