NRS
128.108 Specific considerations where child has been placed in foster
home. If a child is in the custody
of a public or private agency and has been placed and resides in a foster home
and the custodial agency institutes proceedings pursuant to this chapter
regarding the child, with an ultimate goal of having the child’s foster parent
or parents adopt the child, the court shall consider whether the child has
become integrated into the foster family to the extent that the child’s
familial identity is with that family, and whether the foster family is able
and willing permanently to treat the child as a member of the family. The court
shall consider, without limitation:
1. The love, affection and other emotional
ties existing between the child and the parents, and the child’s ties with the
foster family.
2. The capacity and disposition of the
child’s parents from whom the child was removed as compared with that of the
foster family to give the child love, affection and guidance and to continue
the education of the child.
3. The capacity and disposition of the
parents from whom the child was removed as compared with that of the foster
family to provide the child with food, clothing and medical care and to meet
other physical, mental and emotional needs of the child.
4. The length of time the child has lived
in a stable, satisfactory foster home and the desirability of the child
continuing to live in that environment.
5. The permanence as a family unit of the
foster family.
6. The moral fitness, physical and mental
health of the parents from whom the child was removed as compared with that of
the foster family.
7. The experiences of the child in the
home, school and community, both when with the parents from whom the child was
removed and when with the foster family.
8. Any other factor considered by the
court to be relevant to a particular placement of the child.
(Added to NRS by 1981,
1752)
Notes of Decisions
Bush v. State, Department of Human Resources (1996)
nev · cites it 4×
“To terminate parental rights in this case is to accept the unproved dogma of those psychiatrists who see the best interests of the child as the sole determining factor in termination cases and who would have the courts decide the question of parental severance based on an odious…”
Drury v. Lang (1989)
nev · cites it 2×
“*433 Although the district court characterized Joanne’s attempts at communication with the children as “token effort[s] not likely to have led to enhancing the parent-child relationship,” it did not specifically base its finding of jurisdictional grounds, and we believe…”
Donald B. v. Nev. Dep't of Family Servs. (In re S.L.) (2018)
nev
“NRS 128.108. The district court found that the foster family had provided a safe and loving home for the children for over two years, the children were doing well and had bonded with and integrated into the foster family, and the foster parents were willing to adopt them.”
Francisco M. v. State, Division of Child & Family Services (2002)
nev
“Moreover, NRS 128.108 provides that if children in the custody of a public agency reside in a foster home and proceedings have been instituted with the goal of adoption by the foster parent, the district court shall consider whether the children have become fully integrated into…”
Matter of Parental Rights as to KDL (2002)
nev
“[17] However, the district court properly concluded, under NRS 128.108, that the children had formed a well-integrated *187 family bond with a foster family who wished to adopt both children.”
In Re Nj (2009)
nev · cites it 2×
“" NRS 128.108. Other considerations include "[t]he length of time the child has lived in a stable .”
Scalf v. Nevada State Department of Human Resources (1990)
nev
“109, see also NRS 128.108. Having determined that jurisdictional grounds were correctly found on this basis, it is unnecessary for us to discuss other findings supporting jurisdictional grounds.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.108(1) — 2 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.108(3) — 1 case
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.108(4) — 2 cases
In Re Nj (2009)
nev
“" NRS 128.108. Other considerations include "[t]he length of time the child has lived in a stable .”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 128.108(6) — 1 case
Drury v. Lang (1989)
nev
“*433 Although the district court characterized Joanne’s attempts at communication with the children as “token effort[s] not likely to have led to enhancing the parent-child relationship,” it did not specifically base its finding of jurisdictional grounds, and we believe…”
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.