Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107 (2026)
Specific considerations where child is not in physical custody of parent
✓ current as of July 2026 Cite as: Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107 (2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 128.107 Specific considerations where child is not in physical custody
of parent. If a child is not in
the physical custody of the parent or parents, the court, in determining
whether parental rights should be terminated, shall consider, without
limitation:
1. The services provided or offered to the parent or parents to facilitate a reunion with the child.
2. The physical, mental or emotional condition and needs of the child and the child’s desires regarding the termination, if the court determines the child is of sufficient capacity to express his or her desires.
3. The effort the parent or parents have made to adjust their circumstances, conduct or conditions to make it in the child’s best interest to return the child to his or her home after a reasonable length of time, including but not limited to:
(a) The payment of a reasonable portion of substitute physical care and maintenance, if financially able;
(b) The maintenance of regular visitation or other contact with the child which was designed and carried out in a plan to reunite the child with the parent or parents; and
(c) The maintenance of regular contact and communication with the custodian of the child.
4. Whether additional services would be likely to bring about lasting parental adjustment enabling a return of the child to the parent or parents within a predictable period.
Ê For purposes of this section, the court shall disregard incidental conduct, contributions, contacts and communications.
(Added to NRS by 1981, 1751; A 1987, 173)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: Quiana M. B. v. State Department of Family Services
Quiana M. B. v. State Department of Family Services (2012)
“The family division of the district court also did not expressly refer to NRS 128.107, which sets forth certain factors that a court must consider before terminating parental rights when children are not in the physical custody of a parent.”
Tammila G. v. State, Department of Human Resources (2006)
“Second, we decide which party has the burden to present evidence of a child’s desires, under NRS 128.107(2), in a parental rights termination case when the State has established the presumption under NRS 128.”
Champagne v. WELFARE DIV. OF NEV. STATE DEPT. (1984)
“6 *650 The gist of the new ground, which might be abbreviated as “failure of parental adjustment” finds its matrix in NRS 128.107 and 128.108, which enumerate “specific considerations” applicable when a child is not in the physical custody of a parent or when the child has been…”
Deck v. State Department of Human Resources (1997)
“However, NRS 128.107 states, in relevant part, If a child is not in the physical custody of the parent or parents, the court, in determining whether parental rights should be terminated, shall consider, without limitation: *766 1.”
Daly v. Daly (1986)
“Notwithstanding the possible harm that would befall Mary if visitation were resumed, NRS 128.107 provides that the child's desires regarding the termination should be a specific consideration, if the child has sufficient capacity to express his or her desires.”
Vincent L. G. v. State Division of Child & Family Services, Department of Human Resources (2004)
“0126; NRS 128.107. See NRS 432B.540(2) (providing that DCFS place the children as near to the parents as “is consistent with the best interests and special needs of the child”).”
Bush v. State, Department of Human Resources (1996)
“For determining whether there has been a failure of the parents to adjust, NRS 128.107 gives the following guidance: If a child is not in the physical custody of the parent or parents, the court, in determining whether parental rights should be terminated, shall consider,…”
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO L.R.S., J.M.S. AND J.L.S. (2024)
“: This case requires us to decide whether the considerations outlined in NRS 128.107 and NRS 128.109 apply where children are in the physical custody of a parent who is seeking termination of the other parent's SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) t()47A 1-84-3Licir rights.”
Donald B. v. Nev. Dep't of Family Servs. (In re S.L.) (2018)
“NRS 128.107. If the child was placed in a foster home, the district court must consider whether the child has become integrated into the foster family and the family's willingness to be a permanent placement.”
Francisco M. v. State, Division of Child & Family Services (2002)
“NRS 128.107(1) only provides that the court must consider the services provided “to facilitate a reunion with the children]” if the children are not in the physical custody of the parent.”
Matter of Parental Rights as to DRH (2004)
“0126; NRS 128.107. [14] See NRS 432B.540(2) (providing that DCFS place the children as near to the parents as "is consistent with the best interests and special needs of the child").”
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.D.L. AND C.L.B., JR. (2017)
“NRS 128.107(2) further requires the district court to consider the "physical, mental or emotional condition and needs of the child and the child's desires regarding the termination, if the court determines the child is of sufficient capacity to express his or her desires.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(1) — 3 cases
Francisco M. v. State, Division of Child & Family Services (2002)
“NRS 128.107(1) only provides that the court must consider the services provided “to facilitate a reunion with the children]” if the children are not in the physical custody of the parent.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(2) — 8 cases
Tammila G. v. State, Department of Human Resources (2006)
“Second, we decide which party has the burden to present evidence of a child’s desires, under NRS 128.107(2), in a parental rights termination case when the State has established the presumption under NRS 128.”
Champagne v. WELFARE DIV. OF NEV. STATE DEPT. (1984)
“6 *650 The gist of the new ground, which might be abbreviated as “failure of parental adjustment” finds its matrix in NRS 128.107 and 128.108, which enumerate “specific considerations” applicable when a child is not in the physical custody of a parent or when the child has been…”
Deck v. State Department of Human Resources (1997)
“However, NRS 128.107 states, in relevant part, If a child is not in the physical custody of the parent or parents, the court, in determining whether parental rights should be terminated, shall consider, without limitation: *766 1.”
Daly v. Daly (1986)
“Notwithstanding the possible harm that would befall Mary if visitation were resumed, NRS 128.107 provides that the child's desires regarding the termination should be a specific consideration, if the child has sufficient capacity to express his or her desires.”
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO L.R.S., J.M.S. AND J.L.S. (2024)
“: This case requires us to decide whether the considerations outlined in NRS 128.107 and NRS 128.109 apply where children are in the physical custody of a parent who is seeking termination of the other parent's SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) t()47A 1-84-3Licir rights.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(3) — 4 cases
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO L.R.S., J.M.S. AND J.L.S. (2024)
“: This case requires us to decide whether the considerations outlined in NRS 128.107 and NRS 128.109 apply where children are in the physical custody of a parent who is seeking termination of the other parent's SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) t()47A 1-84-3Licir rights.”
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO A.D.L. AND C.L.B., JR. (2017)
“NRS 128.107(2) further requires the district court to consider the "physical, mental or emotional condition and needs of the child and the child's desires regarding the termination, if the court determines the child is of sufficient capacity to express his or her desires.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(3)(b) — 2 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(3)(c) — 1 case
IN RE: PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO L.R.S., J.M.S. AND J.L.S. (2024)
“: This case requires us to decide whether the considerations outlined in NRS 128.107 and NRS 128.109 apply where children are in the physical custody of a parent who is seeking termination of the other parent's SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) t()47A 1-84-3Licir rights.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.107(4) — 8 cases
Quiana M. B. v. State Department of Family Services (2012)
“The family division of the district court also did not expressly refer to NRS 128.107, which sets forth certain factors that a court must consider before terminating parental rights when children are not in the physical custody of a parent.”
Champagne v. WELFARE DIV. OF NEV. STATE DEPT. (1984)
“6 *650 The gist of the new ground, which might be abbreviated as “failure of parental adjustment” finds its matrix in NRS 128.107 and 128.108, which enumerate “specific considerations” applicable when a child is not in the physical custody of a parent or when the child has been…”
Deck v. State Department of Human Resources (1997)
“However, NRS 128.107 states, in relevant part, If a child is not in the physical custody of the parent or parents, the court, in determining whether parental rights should be terminated, shall consider, without limitation: *766 1.”
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.