Important Ruling By New Jersey Supreme Court

I'll keep searching for the right link. I was able to read the op link the day it went up, but now it is broken

oops! sorry!!!! here's the lawyer's take on it [url=http://njcriminallaw.blogspot.com/2010/06/nj-division-of-youth-and-family.html]NJ Criminal Law- Recent Cases: NJ Division of Youth and Family Services v. C.M. (A-74-08)[/url] from the nj court opinions page [url]http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/supreme/Supreme%2009%20term.pdf[/url] 6-1-10 New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services v. C.M. (A-74-08) The judgment of the trial court terminating C.M.’s parental rights is vacated. Defendant C.M. did not endanger his child’s safety, health or development, he was willing to provide a safe and stable home for the child, DYFS failed to make reasonable efforts to provide services to help C.M. correct the circumstances that led to his child’s placement outside the home, the trial court did not consider, in any substantive manner, alternatives to termination of parental rights, and there is no basis in the record to conclude that termination of C.M.’s parental rights to the child will not do more harm than good. In these circumstances, severing C.M.’s ties to his son constituted a gross and unwarranted abuse of the State’s extraordinary power over its citizens.

you can still get the case- google it- then it looks like the link is broken, but click view HTML- and it will pop up in the google cache. I only had time right now to read the summary- there are multiple dissents. I will read it later on this evening and may have more thoughts. Hopeful phrase at the end of the summary at least about "under these facts" usually that the courts way of somewhat limiting the impact of the case- holding it to the facts.

[url=http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/supreme/a-74-08.opn.html]a-74-08.opn.html[/url] I hope this works for you guys. 4-3 split decision...can definitely see both sides. I don't understand the foster care system, but can a parent just say, "I can't parent right now, state, but will you do so until I am ready to?" That seems to be the gist of the situation here. On the other hand, the guy did offer to pay child support, etc...seemingly just in a "bad place" for a while. These are all such tough situations.

okay- I couldn't resist- I read the whole thing. the first paragraph of the dissent summarizes the case fairly well in my opinion- "As a result of the Courts decision today, a four-year-oldchild will be torn from the arms of the only family he has ever known and placed in the custody of his biological father, a fifty-eight-year-old man who fathered the child during an extra-marital affair and who was unwilling to assume parental responsibilities until more than sixteen months after thechildҒs birth. In the fathers absence, the child bonded with foster parents with whom he has lived in a nurturing and lovinghome since he was three months old. In my estimation, no systemof justice which purports to have as its polestar the bestinterests of the child can tolerate the outcome of todayҒsmajority opinion."

Dec '06 father told of paternity Jan '07 through an interpretor and without counsel, stated he couldn't parent May '07 father provided alternative housing;which was not accepted. Aug '07 father finally convinced wife to take in child and offered to parent Ideal? No. but hardly as described by the state I stand by my initial comment in this thread - sad for all involved