Advertisements
We have TPR trial next week. Dad refused a caseplan for the first 12 months of his childs life. When child was 1 he was arrested and senteced to prison. In Jan he refused TPR and requested a trial. He was released 3 weeks ago but has yet to call and request a visit. 6 weeks ago at the last court date judge said he could be relased and set up visits. His mother visited child first week of April and asked about setting up a visit for him since he would be out in a couple of days. caseworker said that was fine, just call. If dad should not call or set up anything, could this be used against him next week, could this work in our favor??
Like
Share
Sorry, I just noticed this message. Not sure if you've already had the TPR trial or if it's this coming week.
Anyway, if I'm understanding correctly, dad was released three weeks ago and hasn't scheduled a visit in that time period. That certainly won't work in his favor, but given it's three weeks (and not three months), it might not be given that much weight.
If the state already has enough evidence to move forward with TPR, I'd consider this as "the lace on a dress" -- it's not the most important aspect (and certainly not enough for TPR on its own), but it does add to the overall look and feel.
Advertisements
I too was thinking it's just something else to add to everything. TPR trial is Wed. GAL visited this past week and said he'd let judge know he was in favor of adoption, but I needed to be realistic and asked what about the chance that dad may be given the chance at a caseplan.. what do you think his chance might be? Everyone is in favor of adoption. This child is a special needs child who doesn't qualify for childcare at this time, and requires serious 1 on 1 time, supervision, and several therapies... Dad is young, 25, and has served 3 prison terms all for the same charge.. drugs, selling, using.. and whatever goes in between.
And thanks LemonPie, your so helpful to all my questions. Very much appreciate it. Not sure if this would be evidence, but dad was given a caseplan when child came into care at 3 days old. He refused DNA test twice, was finally given it when he was in jail for a few weeks. Got out, refused any contact from both caseworker and lawyers, would answer phone only to hang up without saying anything. They sent mail, even certified mail so he HAD to sign for it but still made NO effort in a caseplan. Even when he was arrested last summer. His first time 'caring' was at a court hearing in October... would all this make a difference?
When was the DNA test? Just going on the info you've provided, that's the biggest potential stumbling block -- how long did he have to work the case plan after paternity was established? And did case management make sufficient effort to provide him with the necessary referrals?
Other than that, it sounds like an obvious TPR, but I make that statement without knowing all of the details, the timeline, or the judge. Which means, I wouldn't give my statement a lot of weight.
Of course, a lot will depend (as always) on how the case is presented, the skills of the various lawyers, and the general mindset of the judge.
I believe the DNA results were recieved in Dec 2010 if not late November. The child was 6 months old at the time. Dad had 6 months to make any effort before he was arrested. The orginal casewoker put a serious amound of effort in trying to contact dad, including two certified letters in which he needed to sign for, so she knew that he was absolutly aware of what was being offered from dcf. I have a copy of dad's caseplan, it was very simple.. housing, job, some classes... he never attempted to contact caseworker, or accept calls from her. Never spoke to the caseworker or any attorney from the time the child was born pretty much up until he was arrested. He never went to any court dates until Oct 2011.... I just hope they have enough to TPR, his bio mom is certain he doesn't care, or even have time for, or really want him.
Advertisements
But did the CM include referrals in those certified letters? I don't mean to harp, but I have seen a lack of provided referrals hose up an otherwise solid TPR case.
Did the CM work with dad while he was incarcerated?
Six months to work a case plan wouldn't be considered sufficient where I am (nine month minimum is usually given before TPR is even considered). If, while incarcerated, there was sufficient opportunity to work his case plan (some prisons have appropriate programs, some do not), then the time he was incarcerated might count against him. If there weren't opportunities to work his case plan while incarcerated, that time cannot be counted against him.
IMO, if the referrals aren't 100% in order, the outcome is going to be highly dependent on the judge and the strengths of dad's lawyer.
Again, that's me talking without ever seeing the case file (and not being complete certain of the timeline), so take it with a grain of salt.
Dad's rights were terminated on grounds of abandonment. Judge even stated before closing arguments that given the timeline he gathered he didn't know why we were at trial!! Child is 22 months and has never seen his father. DCF also sent certified letters monthly to the jail and prison, stating caseplan, info, and services offered while incarerated. Dad responded just twice, or maybe 3 times. He never started offered services nor did he ever request a single visit prior to jail sentence or after his release, judge said that took on a lot of weight. Thanks for your help and guidance.
Advertisements