Where I am, while I don't think there are any statutes on when an FP can become a party to the case, I find it difficult to believe that a motion to intervene would be granted before the kiddos had been in care for nine months (normally, that's the earliest they'll consider TPR).
I agree. I believe there aren't any official statues here either, but it is pretty much my understanding that it is 6 months here because we have a 6 month permanency law. So it's either RU, TPR or 6 month extensions at that point in the case because there is always a permanency hearing after 6 months in care. There has to be a lot of progress made by parents to get a 6 month extension and they have to clearly be on the path to RU. Unless there's some technicality which I'm praying doesn't end up factoring in to our case.