Child Attorney Trial Notebook for Deprivation Cases in Georgia’s Juvenile Courts

Mary Hermann
Child Attorney
Consultant
Carl Vinson Institute of Government

For print copies, please contact the Supreme Court of Georgia's Committee on Justice for Children
www.gajusticeforchildren.org
Phone: 404.657.9219

Non-Reunification Hearing

Authority	15-11-58 (h & I)
	Purpose	To determine whether reunification services should continue to be offered to the family To determine whether reunification in the child's best interest To determine if the continuation of reunification services to the family would be detrimental to the child
	Jurisdiction	Same as Adj., Attaches to a pending deprivation action
	Venue	Same as Adj., Attaches to a pending deprivation action
	Timing	Within 30 days where an order of deprivation disposition of a child has been made stating non reunification is the goal Within 30 days of a separate motion for non reunification has been filed Within 30 days of DFCS submitting a case plan which states the goal is non reunification
	Right to Attorney	May be separate action, Prayer in a Deprivation Petition or Motion to Extend Part of case plan Yes
	Parties	Same parties as the Adj., & foster parents
	Order	Recite the reasons why Non Reunification is appropriate plan Approve the long term plan for the child State the terms of the NR, such as visits or contact with parent/siblings/family

Practice Points

Non reunification is NOT a necessary step on the road to TPR; in fact, it is totally unnecessary
Non Reunification should only be granted where DFACS can show by clear and convincing evidence that reunification services would be detrimental to the child; NR is NOT a matter of convenience for DFACS not to have to work with a non complying parent
If Non Reunification is granted, terms can still be dictated such as visits or contact with parent / siblings / extended family if in the child's best interest
NR DOES NOT end the child / parent right to visit & for DFACS to facilitate those visits
Concurrent Plan is possible where DFACS is pursuing both reunification and other permanency options
NR is necessary to some relative placement funding

15-11-58 (h)

When reviewing the determination by the Division of Family and Children Services of the Department of Human Resources that a reunification plan is not appropriate, the court shall determine by clear and convincing evidence whether reasonable efforts to reunify a child with his or her family will be detrimental to the child and that reunification services, therefore, should not be provided or should be terminated. There shall be a presumption that reunification services should not be provided if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that:

The parent has unjustifiably failed to comply with a previously ordered plan designed to reunite the family;

A child has been removed from the home on at least two previous occasions and reunification services were made available on those occasions;

Any of the grounds for terminating parental rights exist, as set forth in subsection (b) of Code Section 15-11-94; or

Any of the circumstances set out in paragraph (4) of subsection (a) of this Code section exist, making it unnecessary to provide reasonable efforts to reunify.

15-11-58 (i)

(i)(1) If the court has entered an order finding that reasonable efforts to reunify a child with his or her family would be detrimental to the child in accordance with subsection (h) of this Code section and if the court finds that referral for termination of parental rights and adoption is not in the best interest of the child, the court may, upon proper petition, enter a custody order which shall remain in effect until the child's eighteenth birthday:

Placing the child in the custody of a relative of the child if such a person is willing and, after study by the probation officer or other person or agency designated by the court, is found by the court to be qualified to receive and care for the child;

Placing the child in the custody of any non-relative individual who, after study by the probation officer or other person or agency designated by the court, is found by the court to be qualified to receive and care for the child;

Placing the child in the custody of a suitable individual custodian in another state pursuant to the provisions of Code Section 15-11-89; or

In the case where the court has found a compelling reason that a placement pursuant to subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of this paragraph is not in the child's best interest, placing the child in the custody of an agency or organization licensed or otherwise authorized by law to receive and provide care for the child which is operated in a manner that provides such care, guidance, and control as would be provided in a family home as defined in the court's order.

Such order may be modified following a petition for modification by a party or upon motion of the court pursuant to Code Section 15-11-40.

(2) A probation officer, judicial citizen review panel established by the court, or other person or agency designated by the court shall, after study or review, submit a report to the court addressing whether the custodian to whom custody of a child has been given pursuant to this Code section continues to be qualified to receive and care for the child within:

Thirty-six months of an order placing a child in the custody of a relative pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of this subsection and every 36 months thereafter; or twelve months of an order placing a child in the custody of a non-relative, an out-of-state custodian, or an agency or organization licensed or otherwise authorized by law to receive and provide care for the child pursuant to subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of this subsection and every 12 months thereafter.

(3) Whenever a child is placed in the custody of an agency or organization licensed or otherwise authorized by law to receive and provide care for the child pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of this subsection, such agency or organization shall be charged with the responsibility of notifying the court within ten days in the event its license is placed on probation, suspended, revoked, or surrendered and, in such event, the court shall conduct a judicial review within ten days of such notification to determine whether another placement should be made for the child.

Back to Child Attorney Trial Notebook Index Page

"Protecting children and promoting their well-being through excellence in courtroom advocacy."
GACC is an affiliate of the National Association of Counsel for Children	GACC Jane Okrasinski Executive Director Email: jane@gaccchildlaw.org