Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 16-2001 (2026)

Purpose.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Purpose.

(1) The purpose of this chapter is to:

(a) Provide for voluntary and involuntary severance of the parent and child relationship and for substitution of parental care and supervision by judicial process, thereby safeguarding the rights and interests of all parties concerned and promoting their welfare and that of the state of Idaho; and

(b) Provide permanency for children who are under the jurisdiction of the court through the child protective act, chapter 16, title 16, Idaho Code, where the court has found the existence of aggravated circumstances or that reasonable efforts to return the child to his or her home have failed.

(2) Implicit in this chapter is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved and that the issue of severing the parent and child relationship is of such vital importance as to require a judicial determination in place of attempts at severance by contractual arrangements, express or implied, for the surrender and relinquishment of children. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to allow discrimination in favor of, or against, on the basis of disability.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 329 cases (136 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: State v. Doe, 144 P.3d 597 (Idaho 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Doe, 144 P.3d 597 (Idaho 2006). · cites it 4× “" I.C. § 16-2001. In Idaho at the time the petition in this case was filed, the statute provided that the State may petition the court for termination of the parent-child relationship when it is in the child's best interest and any one of the following five factors existed: (a)…”

Roe v. Doe, 141 P.3d 1057 (Idaho 2006). · cites it 4× “Our Legislature acknowledges the importance of maintaining the parent-child relationship, as well: “Implicit in [Title 16, Chapter 20] is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved — ” I.C. § 16-2001 (2002). 3 Thus, a party must prove…”

Jane Doe (2015-03) v. John Doe, 358 P.3d 77 (Idaho 2015). · cites it 4× “” I.C. § 16-2001(2). Under this statutory scheme, a parent may bring a petition for termination of the other parent’s parental rights.”

Tanner v. State, Dep't of Health & Welfare, 818 P.2d 310 (Idaho 1991). · cites it 4× “[4] The legislative purpose for providing for termination of the parent and child relationship is set forth in I.C. § 16-2001 which provides: The purpose of this act is to provide for voluntary and involuntary severance of the parent and child relationship and for substitution…”

Matter of Andersen, 589 P.2d 957 (Idaho 1978). · cites it 8× “" In reaching this conclusion, the trial court placed great reliance upon the termination of parental rights statute, I.C. §§ 16-2001 to 2015, and its requirement that such a result be achieved judicially and not by contractual relinquishment.”

Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Doe (In Re Interest of Doe), 426 P.3d 1243 (Idaho 2018). · cites it 2× “3d 689 , 691 (2009) (citing I.C. § 16-2001 ). Thus, "the requisites of due process must be met when the Department intervenes to terminate the parent-child relationship.”

Doe v. Doe, 220 P.3d 1062 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “” Idaho Code § 16-2001 (2) states, “[i]mplicit in this chapter is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved____” “It is axiomatic that preservation of the family unit is a right protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth…”

State v. Doe, 172 P.3d 1114 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 2× ““Implicit in [the Termination of Parent and Child Relationship] act is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved____” I.C. § 16-2001. “A parent’s right to custody, care and control of his or her child is a fundamental liberty right…”

In Re Adoption of Doe, 141 P.3d 1057 (Idaho 2006). · cites it 4× “" I.C. § 16-2001 (2002). [3] Thus, a party must prove the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence.”

Doe v. State, 53 P.3d 341 (Idaho 2002). · cites it 2× “” I.C. § 16-2001. A trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights must be based on clear and convincing evidence.”

State v. Doe, 146 P.3d 649 (Idaho 2006). · cites it 2× ““Implicit in [the Termination of Parent and Child Relationship] act is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved____” I.C. § 16-2001. Additionally, the explicit purpose of this act is to promote the welfare of both parents and…”

Doe v. Dep't of Health & Welfare, 203 P.3d 689 (Idaho 2009). · cites it 2× “” I.C. § 16-2001. Therefore, the requisites of due process must be met when the Department intervenes to terminate the parent-child relationship.”

Show all 329 citing cases →

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(1) — 2 cases

Jane Doe & John Doe 1 v. John Doe (Idaho Ct. App. 2024).

John Doe I & Jane Doe I v. John Doe (Idaho Ct. App. 2024).

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(1)(a) — 3 cases

Jane Doe & John Doe 1 v. John Doe (Idaho Ct. App. 2024).

Jane Doe v. John Doe, 560 P.3d 1140 (Idaho Ct. App. 2024).

RE: Termination of Parental Rights (Idaho 2014).

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(1)(b) — 1 case

Dept of Health & Welfare v. Doe I (2017-21) (Idaho 2017).

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(2) — 251 cases

Roe v. Doe, 141 P.3d 1057 (Idaho 2006). “Our Legislature acknowledges the importance of maintaining the parent-child relationship, as well: “Implicit in [Title 16, Chapter 20] is the philosophy that wherever possible family life should be strengthened and preserved — ” I.C. § 16-2001 (2002). 3 Thus, a party must prove…”

Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Doe, 277 P.3d 400 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012).

Jane Doe (2015-03) v. John Doe, 358 P.3d 77 (Idaho 2015). “” I.C. § 16-2001(2). Under this statutory scheme, a parent may bring a petition for termination of the other parent’s parental rights.”

In Re Adoption of Doe, 141 P.3d 1057 (Idaho 2006). “" I.C. § 16-2001 (2002). [3] Thus, a party must prove the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence.”

Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Doe, 397 P.3d 1159 (Idaho Ct. App. 2017).

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(b) — 2 cases

Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Doe, 232 P.3d 837 (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

In the Matter of Termination of Parent-Child Relationship (Idaho Ct. App. 2010).

— Idaho Code § 16-2001(l)(a) — 3 cases

Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Doe, 318 P.3d 886 (Idaho 2014).

John & Jane Doe II v. John Doe I, 395 P.3d 814 (Idaho 2017).

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.