Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor: The Termination of Parental Rights Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor
Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor explains that a termination of parental rights is a court order that severs the rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations between a parent and child. An article featuring Dean O'Connor.

PHOENIX, AZ, August 01, 2010 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor: The Termination of Parental Rights Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor

Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor explains that a termination of parental rights is a court order that severs the rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations between a parent and child. A termination of parental rights may be voluntary or involuntary, according to Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor.
What are the reasons not to terminate parental rights?
Federal regulations state that a "compelling reason" must be based on the individual circumstances of the child and the family, on a case-by-case basis, that has an emphasis on what is in the best interest of the child.
Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor points out that the judge determines what is in the best interest of the child with the aid of the following factors: age and sex of the child; mental and physical health of the child and the parents; lifestyle and other social factors of the parents; emotional ties between the parents and the child; ability of the parents to provide the child with food, shelter, clothing, and medical care; established living pattern for the child concerning school, home, community, and religious institution; quality of schooling; and child's preference.
Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor informs that a compelling reason has to be documented in the case plan to ensure continued eligibility for the receipt of Title IV-E funds. This case-plan documentation is necessary, Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor adds, because there is no federal requirement for the juvenile court to find that a compelling reason exists.
Provided by Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor, federal regulations add that compelling reasons for not filing a petition to terminate parental rights include:
• Adoption is not the appropriate permanency goal for the child;
• No grounds to file a petition to terminate parental rights exist;
• The child is an unaccompanied refugee minor as defined in 45 Code of Federal Regulations 400.111; or
• There are international legal obligations or compelling foreign policy reasons that would preclude terminating parental rights.
Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor has found that this comes from 42 United States Code (USC) Section 675, 45 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1356.21, and Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 706.6(l) and 727.3 (i).
No state has defined "compelling reasons" why termination of parental rights would not be in the child's best interest. Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor recalls that at least two states, however, provided examples. For instance, Iowa's law says that compelling reasons include a reasonable likelihood that completion of services will make it possible for the child to safely remain home or return home within six months. Also, in West Virginia, compelling reasons include the child's age and preference regarding termination of parental rights and that the child is in placement as a juvenile delinquent.
A few states have enacted other exceptions. Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor has learned that although not expressly authorized by Adoption and Safe Families Act, these could be considered "compelling reasons" why termination of parental rights should not be initiated. California provides an exception when the parent has maintained contact and the child would benefit from continuing the relationship. California, Iowa, and Rhode Island allow for an exception when the court finds that the child's return home is probable within a specified period of time. California also provides exceptions for cases in which the child is 12 or older and objects to termination of parental rights, or in which the child is in a residential facility, adoption is unlikely, and termination of parental rights is unnecessary for placement of the child with a permanent family. Finally, Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor notes that Colorado's law provides that 15 months in foster care is not a ground for termination of parental rights when it is due to circumstances beyond the parent's control, such as court delays or incarceration.

Press Release Contact Information:

Dean O'Connor Attorney Dean O'Connor Attorney
Sallquist Drummond & O'Connor
Dean O'Connor Attorney
1430 E. Missouri Ave, #B - 125
Phoenix, Arizona
United States 85014
Voice: (602) 956-9555
Fax: (602) 224-9366
Website: Visit Our Website