Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 39.6221 (2025)

Permanent guardianship of a dependent child.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

39.6221 Permanent guardianship of a dependent child.—

(1) If a court determines that reunification or adoption is not in the best interest of the child, the court may place the child in a permanent guardianship with a relative or other adult approved by the court if all of the following conditions are met:

(a) The child has been in the placement for not less than the preceding 6 months, or the preceding 3 months if the caregiver is already known by the child and such caregiver has been named as the successor guardian on the child’s guardianship assistance agreement.

(b) The permanent guardian is suitable and able to provide a safe and permanent home for the child.

(c) The court determines that the child and the relative or other adult are not likely to need supervision or services of the department to ensure the stability of the permanent guardianship.

(d) The permanent guardian has made a commitment to provide for the child until the child reaches the age of majority and to prepare the child for adulthood and independence.

(e) The permanent guardian agrees to give notice of any change in his or her residential address or the residence of the child by filing a written document in the dependency file of the child with the clerk of the court.

(f) The child demonstrates a strong attachment to the prospective permanent guardian, and such guardian has a strong commitment to permanently caring for the child.

(2) In its written order establishing a permanent guardianship, the court shall:

(a) List the circumstances or reasons why the child’s parents are not fit to care for the child and why reunification is not possible by referring to specific findings of fact made in its order adjudicating the child dependent or by making separate findings of fact;

(b) State the reasons why a permanent guardianship is being established instead of adoption;

(d) Specify the frequency and nature of visitation or contact between the child and his or her grandparents, under s. 39.509;

(e) Specify the frequency and nature of visitation or contact between the child and his or her siblings; and

(f) Require that the permanent guardian not return the child to the physical care and custody of the person from whom the child was removed without the approval of the court.

(3) The court shall give the permanent guardian a separate order establishing the authority of the permanent guardian to care for the child and providing any other information the court deems proper which can be provided to persons who are not parties to the proceeding as necessary, notwithstanding the confidentiality provisions of s. 39.202.

(4) A permanent guardianship of a dependent child established under this chapter is not a plenary guardianship and is not subject to the requirements of chapter 744.

(5) The court shall retain jurisdiction over the case and the child shall remain in the custody of the permanent guardian unless the order creating the permanent guardianship is modified by the court. The court shall discontinue regular review hearings and relieve the department of the responsibility for supervising the placement of the child. Not withstanding the retention of jurisdiction, the placement shall be considered permanency for the child.

(6) Placement of a child in a permanent guardianship does not terminate the parent-child relationship, including:

(a) The right of the child to inherit from his or her parents;

(b) The parents’ right to consent to the child’s adoption; and

(7) The requirements of s. 61.13001 do not apply to permanent guardianships established under this section.

History.—s. 20, ch. 2006-86; s. 4, ch. 2007-5; s. 19, ch. 2017-151; s. 9, ch. 2018-103; s. 5, ch. 2024-177.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 54 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016). · cites it 6× “” Section 39.6221, specifically states: “[i]f a court determines that reunification or adoption is not in the best interest of the child, the court may place the child in a permanent guardianship with a relative or other adult approved by the court.”

CA v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). · cites it 7× “[1] § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); see J.R.”

T.B., the Father v. Dep't Of Child. & Families, 189 So. 3d 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). · cites it 12× “It then made conclusory statements regarding the need for the permanent guardianship without specific facts showing why the father was not fit to care for his daughters. It adjusted a visitation schedule for the father because of the permanent guardian’s relocation out of state.”

Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. A.A., 171 So. 3d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). · cites it 4× “” § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). Section 39.”

M.G. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 86 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). · cites it 10× “§ 39.6221(2), Fla. Stat. The guardianship order in our case is a form order, with which the trial court filled in the blanks.”

RT, SR. v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 27 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). · cites it 5× “Although the record contains sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s ruling, we must reverse and remand for the entry of an order containing factual findings regarding the issue of reunification sufficient to comply with the statutory mandate set forth in section…”

Interest of K.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 86 So. 3d 556 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). · cites it 3× “The mother also argues that the trial court’s order failed to make the proper findings pursuant to section 39.6221(2)(a)-(f). However, since we conclude the mother’s due process rights were violated, there is no need to address the mother’s second issue concerning the trial…”

In the Interest of R.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 118 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). · cites it 5× “Section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2012), lists the factors that the trial court must consider in determining that reunification or adoption is not in the best interest of the child and that a permanent guardianship is appropriate.”

State, Dep't of Child. & Families v. Interest of B.D., 102 So. 3d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). · cites it 3× “This was a elosed dependency case; the trial court placed the child in a permanent guardianship pursuant to section 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2011). The mother’s parental rights were not terminated.”

CS v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 41 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). · cites it 3× “, in permanent guardianship pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2010).”

C.A. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 27 So. 3d 241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). · cites it 2× “We accept this concession of error as proper because written findings are required by section 39.6221(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2009).”

J.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 130 So. 3d 753 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). · cites it 6× “Section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2012), authorizes a court to establish a permanent guardianship of a dependent child.”

Show all 54 citing cases →

— 39.6221(1) — 10 cases

Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Prog. v. A.A., 171 So. 3d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015). “” § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). Section 39.”

S.M., etc. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families, 202 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 2016). “” Section 39.6221, specifically states: “[i]f a court determines that reunification or adoption is not in the best interest of the child, the court may place the child in a permanent guardianship with a relative or other adult approved by the court.”

CA v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “[1] § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); see J.R.”

State, Dep't of Child. & Families v. Interest of B.D., 102 So. 3d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “This was a elosed dependency case; the trial court placed the child in a permanent guardianship pursuant to section 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2011). The mother’s parental rights were not terminated.”

IZ v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 967 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

— 39.6221(1)(a) — 2 cases

Dep't of Child. & Families v. L., L. (Fla. 2d DCA 2025).

Dep't of Child. & Families v. J.J., a Child, & the Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Off. (Fla. 4th DCA 2024).

— 39.6221(2) — 8 cases

M.G. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 86 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). “§ 39.6221(2), Fla. Stat. The guardianship order in our case is a form order, with which the trial court filled in the blanks.”

T.B., the Father v. Dep't Of Child. & Families, 189 So. 3d 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). “It then made conclusory statements regarding the need for the permanent guardianship without specific facts showing why the father was not fit to care for his daughters. It adjusted a visitation schedule for the father because of the permanent guardian’s relocation out of state.”

CS v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 41 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). “, in permanent guardianship pursuant to section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2010).”

J.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 130 So. 3d 753 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). “Section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2012), authorizes a court to establish a permanent guardianship of a dependent child.”

R.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 6 So. 3d 736 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

— 39.6221(2)(a) — 18 cases

CA v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “[1] § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); see J.R.”

C.A. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 27 So. 3d 241 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). “We accept this concession of error as proper because written findings are required by section 39.6221(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2009).”

RT, SR. v. Dept. of Child. & Families, 27 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “Although the record contains sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s ruling, we must reverse and remand for the entry of an order containing factual findings regarding the issue of reunification sufficient to comply with the statutory mandate set forth in section…”

J.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 18 So. 3d 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).

— 39.6221(2)(c) — 11 cases

CA v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 988 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). “[1] § 39.6221(1), Fla. Stat. (2007); see J.R.”

In the Interest of R.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 118 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). “Section 39.6221, Florida Statutes (2012), lists the factors that the trial court must consider in determining that reunification or adoption is not in the best interest of the child and that a permanent guardianship is appropriate.”

S.W-R. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 64 So. 3d 1283 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011).

C.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 108 So. 3d 699 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013).

— 39.6221(3) — 1 case

Interest of K.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 86 So. 3d 556 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). “The mother also argues that the trial court’s order failed to make the proper findings pursuant to section 39.6221(2)(a)-(f). However, since we conclude the mother’s due process rights were violated, there is no need to address the mother’s second issue concerning the trial…”

— 39.6221(5) — 6 cases

A.H. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 144 So. 3d 662 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

IZ v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 967 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

— 39.6221(6) — 2 cases

T.A.S., R.A.S. v. Florida Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).

— 39.6221(l)(a) — 1 case

Dep't of Child. & Families v. In the Interest of J.F., 959 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

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.