Family Law Questions? Ask a Family Lawyer Online.
Good evening. My name is Brandon. Ultimately, it's not up to the Department of Children and Family Services to decide what is true. They can take immediate, emergency action when they believe that a child is in imminent danger, but they then have to set a court date and give the parents the opportunity to be heard. If DCFS can't prove to the court that continued removal is necessary for the safety of the child, or if DCFS fails to schedule a court hearing, the child is returned. Furthermore, even if danger is proven, the child can only be permanently taken if there's no chance of successful reunification between the parent(s) and child.
So, for a parent who has just had their child taken, they can normally expect to be notified of a court date within a few days. Counsel will be provided if needed. Please let me know if any of that doesn't make sense and please remember to leave a rating once you are finished (it is how I am credited for my answer). Thanks.
"takes a child from a foster child"... I do apologize, but I'm not sure that I understand. Can you rephrase?
I'm still confused. Are you talking about a minor who is a parent?
Well, poverty alone isn't legal cause to remove a child from his or her parent.
Yes, and that's why it's important to recognize that DFCS doesn't have the final say.
I'm not sure without seeing the notice of hearing. Will this be the first court hearing?
What does it call the hearing on the notice?
If mom and child had the same GAL, it would normally create a conflict of interest for the GAL. The GAL would know information about the mom that would otherwise not be available, and that information would be used to "represent the child", possibly in contradiction to the mother's objectives. It's potentially pretty serious and could cause a case to start over from scratch.
It's like this: imagine a criminal case where the defendant is on trial for murder. The defendant tells his attorney all sorts of confidential information that could be used against him in court if the prosecution was aware of it. Now, imagine if the defendant's attorney quit and became the prosecutor in the case. It would be unfair to the defendant and it would be unethical for the attorney. It's a similar situation--the GAL represented the mother and later represented her child; the communications between mother and GAL could compromise the case by the GAL representing the child.
Terrific, I'm very glad to hear that. It was my pleasure, and please feel free to leave a positive rating (it's how I am credited). Thank you :-)