CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Dependency Petitions
......Dispositional Hearing
.........Reunification & Visitation
............Parental Visitation: In General
 16 Cards On This Topic:
  • It is not the role of the juvenile ct. to sua sponte come up with a solution to a child’s refusal to visit a parent under a visitation order.
  • At a dispositional hearing, juvenile ct. may suspend or deny parents' visitation with their child if it would be inconsistent with the child's physical or emotional well-being; ct. may have even more leeway on this issue at a detention hearing.
  • Trial ct. did not abuse its discretion when it denied mother's motions to have a neutral observer present at all sibling visits and to strike the SW's testimony and report.
  • Court did not abuse discretion in denying mother's request for psychological evaluation to assist court in deciding on whether to grant her reunification services.
  • Reasonable services not provided where DCFS abdicated responsibility to effectuate timely counseling for minor and conjoint counseling with father, precluding meaningful visitation.
  • Mother's due process rights to notice and opportunity to be heard compromised when court modified existing visitation order after unsuccessful mediation w/out holding properly noticed §388 hearing.
  • By denying mother reunification with Ms she sent out of danger of war, court gave undue weight to Ms’ desires and too little to mother’s potentially positive influence.
  • Court may not abdicate responsibility to create reasonable visitation and transportation order in reunification plan by simple talisman of mileage limitation.
  • Reversal required where reunification and visitation inadequate; no meaningful distinction between case with no reunification plan, and case where plan developed but not implemented.
  • Courts must be cautious in making visitation orders which require minor to be shuffled among several caretakers.
  • Reversal req’d where reunification and visitation inadequate; no meaningful distinction between case with no reunification plan, and case where plan developed but not implemented.
  • Court should specify frequency and duration of visits.
  • Rights of parents to visit must be balanced with child’s best interests.
  • Child’s belief father harmed her and her fear of him is relevant to issue of whether or not continued contact is in child’s best interests.
  • Visitation rights may be granted while termination of parental rights pending; issue separately appealable; may not delegate issue to social worker.
  • Parental visitation after 366.26 finding that M is adoptable.


    •