(a) When the juvenile court enters an order removing a child from his or her home and places the child into foster care or custody of the Department of Human Resources pursuant to this chapter, the order shall contain specific findings, if warranted by the evidence, within the following time periods while making child safety the paramount concern:
(1) In the first order of the juvenile court that sanctions the removal, whether continuation of the residence of the child in the home would be contrary to the welfare of the child. This order may be the pick-up order that the juvenile court issues on the filing of a dependency petition.
(2) Within 60 days after the child is removed from the home of the child, whether reasonable efforts have been made to prevent removal of the child or whether reasonable efforts were not required to be made.
(3) Within 12 months after the child is removed from the home of the child and not less than every 12 months thereafter during the continuation of the child in out-of-home care, whether reasonable efforts have been made to finalize the existing permanency plan.
(b) As used in this chapter, reasonable efforts refers to efforts made to preserve and reunify families prior to the placement of a child in foster care, to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the home of the child, and to make it possible for a child to return safely to the home of the child. In determining the reasonable efforts to be made with respect to a child, and in making these reasonable efforts, the health and safety of the child shall be the paramount concern. If continuation of reasonable efforts is determined to be inconsistent with the permanency plan for the child, reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan including, if appropriate, through an interstate placement, and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize a permanent plan for the child.
(c) Reasonable efforts shall not be required to be made with respect to a parent of the child if the juvenile court has determined that the parental rights of the parent to a sibling of the child have been involuntarily terminated or that a parent has done any of the following:
(1) Subjected a child to an aggravated circumstance against the child or a sibling of the child and the risk of child abuse or neglect is too high for the child to remain at home safely or to be returned home. An aggravated circumstance includes, but is not limited to, aggravated stalking, abandonment, torture, or chronic abuse. An aggravated circumstance may also include any of the following:
a. Allowing a child to use alcohol or illegal drugs to the point of abuse, neglect, or substantial risk of harm.
b. Substance misuse or abuse, or both, by a parent or interfering with the ability to keep the child safe and refusal of a parent to participate in or complete treatment, or where treatment has been unsuccessful.
c. A parent demonstrating extreme disinterest in the child by doing either of the following:
1. Not complying with the steps outlined in the individualized service plan or case plan over a period of six months.
2. Repeatedly leaving the child with someone who is unwilling or incapable of providing care and not returning for the child as promised.
d. Abandoning an infant or young child when the identity of the child is unknown and the parent is unknown or unable to be located after a diligent search.
e. When the parent has an emotional or mental condition and there is clearly no treatment that can improve or strengthen the condition enough to allow the child to remain at home safely or to return home safely.
f. When a parent is incarcerated and the child is deprived of a safe, stable, and permanent parent-child relationship.
(2) Committed murder or manslaughter of another child or murder or manslaughter of the other parent of the child.
(3) Been convicted of rape in the first degree pursuant to Section 13A-6-61, sodomy in the first degree pursuant to Section 13A-6-63, or incest pursuant to Section 13A-13-3. The juvenile court shall make a finding that the crime of rape, sodomy, incest, or other sexual abuse actually occurred by the parent against a child in any instance where the parent has been convicted as described in this subdivision.
(4) Aided or abetted, attempted, conspired, or solicited to commit murder or manslaughter of another child or aided or abetted, attempted, conspired, or solicited to commit murder or manslaughter of the other parent of the child.
(5) Committed a felony assault which resulted in serious bodily injury to the child or another child or to the other parent of the child. The term serious bodily injury means bodily injury which involves substantial risk of death, extreme physical pain, protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.
(d) Nothing in the exceptions to making reasonable efforts listed in subsection (c) shall be interpreted to require the reunification of a child with a stepparent or paramour of a parent under similar circumstances. The crimes listed in subsection (c) may include those from other states or federal crimes if the elements of the crimes are substantially similar to those crimes in this state.
(e) If reasonable efforts are not made with respect to a child as a result of a determination made by a juvenile court in situations as described above, a permanency hearing, as provided in Section 12-15-315, in which in-state or out-of-state placement options for the child are considered, shall be held for the child within 30 days after the determination. Reasonable efforts shall be made to place the child in a timely manner in accordance with the permanency plan and to complete whatever steps are necessary to finalize permanent placement of the child. Reasonable efforts to place a child for adoption or with a legal guardian or legal custodian, including identifying appropriate in-state and out-of-state placements, may be made concurrently with other reasonable efforts.
(Act 2008-277, p. 441, §18; Act 2019-512, §2.)
Notes of Decisions
D.P. v. Limestone Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 28 So. 3d 759 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
· cites it 9× “During the January 30, 2009, hearing, DHR apparently argued that § 12-15-312(c)(2), the current AJJA provision, governed the juvenile court’s decision on its motion, and the father argued that former § 12-15-65(m)(2) governed; the juvenile court’s post-hearing order recited the…”
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
· cites it 11× “Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
W.A. v. Calhoun Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 211 So. 3d 849 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
· cites it 5× “If, as required by § 12-15-312, Ala.Code 1975, DHR is not assisting the parents with reasonable efforts during that period, the parent should bring that matter to the attention of the juvenile court so that it can redirect DHR as necessary and assure compliance with *855 the…”
H.B. v. Mobile Cnty. Dep't of Human Res., 236 So. 3d 875 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “In its judgment, the juvenile court found that DHR's efforts at rehabilitation had failed and that the mother had not adjusted her circumstances to meet the needs of the child. The record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to sustain those findings.”
T.B. v. Lee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 216 So. 3d 1246 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
· cites it 6× “By its plain language, § 12-15-312 applies only “[w]hen the juvenile court enters an order removing a child from his or her home and places the child into foster care or custody of the Department of Human Resources pursuant to this chapter [i.”
Y.N. v. Jefferson Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 67 So. 3d 76 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “See Ala.Code 1975, § 12-15-312. Those efforts usually require that, during the reunification process, while a child remains dependent, the juvenile court provide some form of parental visitation.”
C.S. v. Mobile Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 166 So. 3d 680 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
· cites it 3× “Ala. Code 1975, § 12-15-312(c) (indicating that reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families are not required if a juvenile court determines that parental rights to a sibling have been involuntarily terminated).”
T.D.K. v. L.A.W. & T.M., 78 So. 3d 1006 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011).
“§ 12-15-312(c), Ala.Code 1975. Thus, the juvenile court in this case was not required to consider counseling or some other method of rehabilitating the mother to prevent further abuse of the children.”
S.G. v. Barbour Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 148 So. 3d 439 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “In May 2012, while the mother was still an inpatient at Searcy, DHR filed a motion seeking a determination that, pursuant to § 12-15-312(c), Ala.Code 1975, 4 it was not *443 required to make reasonable efforts to reunite the child with the mother because the mother’s parental…”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(a) — 2 cases
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
T.B. v. Lee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 216 So. 3d 1246 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
“By its plain language, § 12-15-312 applies only “[w]hen the juvenile court enters an order removing a child from his or her home and places the child into foster care or custody of the Department of Human Resources pursuant to this chapter [i.”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(a)(2) — 3 cases
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(a)(3) — 4 cases
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(b) — 20 cases
W.A. v. Calhoun Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 211 So. 3d 849 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
“If, as required by § 12-15-312, Ala.Code 1975, DHR is not assisting the parents with reasonable efforts during that period, the parent should bring that matter to the attention of the juvenile court so that it can redirect DHR as necessary and assure compliance with *855 the…”
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(c) — 13 cases
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
W.A. v. Calhoun Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 211 So. 3d 849 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
“If, as required by § 12-15-312, Ala.Code 1975, DHR is not assisting the parents with reasonable efforts during that period, the parent should bring that matter to the attention of the juvenile court so that it can redirect DHR as necessary and assure compliance with *855 the…”
T.D.K. v. L.A.W. & T.M., 78 So. 3d 1006 (Ala. Civ. App. 2011).
“§ 12-15-312(c), Ala.Code 1975. Thus, the juvenile court in this case was not required to consider counseling or some other method of rehabilitating the mother to prevent further abuse of the children.”
S.G. v. Barbour Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 148 So. 3d 439 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013).
“In May 2012, while the mother was still an inpatient at Searcy, DHR filed a motion seeking a determination that, pursuant to § 12-15-312(c), Ala.Code 1975, 4 it was not *443 required to make reasonable efforts to reunite the child with the mother because the mother’s parental…”
C.S. v. Mobile Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 166 So. 3d 680 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
“Ala. Code 1975, § 12-15-312(c) (indicating that reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families are not required if a juvenile court determines that parental rights to a sibling have been involuntarily terminated).”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(c)(1) — 5 cases
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(c)(2) — 2 cases
D.P. v. Limestone Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 28 So. 3d 759 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
“During the January 30, 2009, hearing, DHR apparently argued that § 12-15-312(c)(2), the current AJJA provision, governed the juvenile court’s decision on its motion, and the father argued that former § 12-15-65(m)(2) governed; the juvenile court’s post-hearing order recited the…”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(c)(l) — 2 cases
C.S. v. Mobile Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 166 So. 3d 680 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
“Ala. Code 1975, § 12-15-312(c) (indicating that reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify families are not required if a juvenile court determines that parental rights to a sibling have been involuntarily terminated).”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(e) — 2 cases
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
— Ala. Code § 12-15-312(e)(l) — 1 case
F.V.O. v. Coffee Cnty. Dep't of Human Resources, 145 So. 3d 11 (Ala. Civ. App. 2012).
“Section 12-15-312(a), Ala.Code 1975, does not require juvenile-court judges to passively receive and review the permanency plan developed and presented by DHR; rather, a juvenile-court judge is required to actively "determine” the appropriate permanency plan for the child, which…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.