Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337 (2026)

Commitment to custody of Department of Human Services

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      419B.337 Commitment to custody of Department of Human Services. (1) When the court determines it would be in the best interest and for the welfare of a ward, the court may place the ward in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services for care, placement and supervision. When the court enters an order removing a ward from the ward’s home or an order continuing care, the court shall make a written finding as to whether:

      (a) Removal of the ward from the ward’s home or continuation of care is in the best interest and for the welfare of the ward;

      (b) Reasonable efforts, considering the circumstances of the ward and parent, have been made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the ward from the home or to make it possible for the ward to safely return home. In making this finding, the court shall consider the ward’s health and safety the paramount concerns; and

      (c) Diligent efforts have been made to place the ward pursuant to ORS 419B.192.

      (2) The court may specify the particular type of care, supervision or services to be provided by the Department of Human Services to wards placed in the department’s custody and to the parents or guardians of the wards, but the actual planning and provision of such care, supervision or services is the responsibility of the department. The department may place the ward in a child care center authorized to accept the ward.

      (3) The court may make an order regarding visitation by the ward’s parents or siblings. The Department of Human Services is responsible for developing and implementing a visitation plan consistent with the court’s order.

      (4) Uniform commitment blanks, in a form approved by the Director of Human Services, shall be used by all courts for placing wards in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services.

      (5) If the ward has been placed in the custody of the Department of Human Services, the court shall make no commitment directly to any residential facility, but shall cause the ward to be delivered into the custody of the department at the time and place fixed by rules of the department. A ward so committed may not be placed in a Department of Corrections institution.

      (6) Commitment of a ward to the Department of Human Services continues until dismissed by the court or until the ward becomes 21 years of age.

      (7) A court may dismiss commitment of a ward to the Department of Human Services if:

      (a)(A) Dismissal is appropriate because the ward has been safely reunited with a parent or because a safe alternative to reunification has been implemented for the ward; and

      (B) The ward is at least 14 years of age but less than 21 years of age and the court finds that:

      (i) The department has provided case planning pursuant to ORS 419B.343 that addresses the ward’s needs and goals for a transition to successful adulthood, including needs and goals relating to housing, physical and mental health, education, employment, community connections and supportive relationships;

      (ii) The department has provided appropriate services pursuant to the case plan;

      (iii) The department has involved the ward in the development of the case plan and in the provision of appropriate services; and

      (iv) The ward has safe and stable housing and is unlikely to become homeless as a result of dismissal of commitment of the ward to the department; or

      (b) The ward has been committed to the custody of the Oregon Youth Authority. [1993 c.33 §108; 1993 c.546 §129; 1999 c.859 §10; 2003 c.396 §57; 2005 c.679 §1; 2007 c.806 §6; 2015 c.254 §6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 66 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 83× “” The court stated that it was relying on ORS 419B.337 and ORS 419B.387. The court indicated, “[T]hey’ve met those standards.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. F. J. M., 370 Or. 434 (Or. 2022). · cites it 8× “387] requires a showing of a need for the examination for treatment or training directed toward reunification.” (Emphasis in original.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. A. F. (In re D. G.), 433 P.3d 459 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 16× “Mother argues that there is no rational relationship between the ordered evaluation and the jurisdictional bases and that the juvenile court therefore exceeded its authority under ORS 419B.337(2). DHS contends that the evidence was sufficient to meet the low threshold to…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. F. J. M., 312 Or. App. 301 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 17× “1 In ruling, the juvenile court framed the issue as being that “[t]he court needs to find that there is a rational basis between what it orders parents to do and the allegations that were * * * found against the father”; addressed the evi- dence; and then concluded that a…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. L. J. W., 460 P.3d 540 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 9× “Under ORS 419B.337(2), the court may also order a psychological evaluation when rationally related to a basis of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction.”
State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Brown, 27 P.3d 502 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 9× “They contend that ORS 419B.337 (1997) 2 required the court to make written findings in the order that SCF had made reasonable efforts to reunify the family—a finding commonly referred to as a “reasonable efforts” finding—and that the order does not contain the required finding.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. P. W., 460 P.3d 1044 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “ORS 419B.337 authorizes the court to order DHS to provide certain types of services, but it allocates responsibility for actual case planning and the provision of services to DHS.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. L. H., 284 P.3d 1233 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “” ORS 419B.337(1) (emphasis added). In addition, if the court awards custody to DHS, ORS 419B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. R. F., 273 P.3d 87 (Or. 2012). · cites it 4× “The Court of Appeals concluded that the juvenile court possesses authority to enter the order under ORS 419B.337(3), which authorizes the court to “make an order regarding visitation by the ward’s parents or siblings.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. K. J. (In re K. L. J.), 435 P.3d 819 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “ORS 419B.337(2). Because ORS 419B.343(1)(a) requires DHS to ensure that its case planning for family reunification "bears a rational relationship" to the findings that brought the child within the court's jurisdiction, we have interpreted ORS 419B.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 9× “Thus, we are not called upon to decide whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by choosing to place children in DHS custody under ORS 419B.337, rather than placing them in the custody of great-grandmother under ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. O. B., 493 P.3d 553 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 6× “387 provides: “If the court finds in an evidentiary hearing that treat- ment or training is needed by a parent to correct the cir- cumstances that resulted in wardship or to prepare the 1 There are two statutes under which a juvenile court may order a parent to participate in a…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(1) — 15 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “” The court stated that it was relying on ORS 419B.337 and ORS 419B.387. The court indicated, “[T]hey’ve met those standards.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. J. S., 368 Or. 516 (Or. 2021).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. P., 275 P.3d 979 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. L. H., 284 P.3d 1233 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “” ORS 419B.337(1) (emphasis added). In addition, if the court awards custody to DHS, ORS 419B.”
State v. A. L. M., 220 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(1)(b) — 1 case
Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. M. T., 243 P.3d 836 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(2) — 32 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “” The court stated that it was relying on ORS 419B.337 and ORS 419B.387. The court indicated, “[T]hey’ve met those standards.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. F. J. M., 370 Or. 434 (Or. 2022). “387] requires a showing of a need for the examination for treatment or training directed toward reunification.” (Emphasis in original.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. A. F. (In re D. G.), 433 P.3d 459 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “Mother argues that there is no rational relationship between the ordered evaluation and the jurisdictional bases and that the juvenile court therefore exceeded its authority under ORS 419B.337(2). DHS contends that the evidence was sufficient to meet the low threshold to…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. F. J. M., 312 Or. App. 301 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “1 In ruling, the juvenile court framed the issue as being that “[t]he court needs to find that there is a rational basis between what it orders parents to do and the allegations that were * * * found against the father”; addressed the evi- dence; and then concluded that a…”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. L. J. W., 460 P.3d 540 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Under ORS 419B.337(2), the court may also order a psychological evaluation when rationally related to a basis of the juvenile court’s jurisdiction.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(3) — 5 cases
Dept. of Human Servs. v. W. C. T., 501 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “” The court stated that it was relying on ORS 419B.337 and ORS 419B.387. The court indicated, “[T]hey’ve met those standards.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. R. F., 273 P.3d 87 (Or. 2012). “The Court of Appeals concluded that the juvenile court possesses authority to enter the order under ORS 419B.337(3), which authorizes the court to “make an order regarding visitation by the ward’s parents or siblings.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. L. H., 284 P.3d 1233 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “” ORS 419B.337(1) (emphasis added). In addition, if the court awards custody to DHS, ORS 419B.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. T. M. G., 475 P.3d 936 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. R. F., 261 P.3d 42 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(5) — 4 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. E. K. H., 389 P.3d 1181 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “Thus, we are not called upon to decide whether the juvenile court abused its discretion by choosing to place children in DHS custody under ORS 419B.337, rather than placing them in the custody of great-grandmother under ORS 419B.”
Wyatt B. v. Kotek (D. Or. 2021).
Wyatt B. v. Kotek (D. Or. 2021).
Wyatt B. v. Kotek (D. Or. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(6) — 3 cases
State v. A. L. M., 220 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. L. J., 226 P.3d 112 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Alm, 220 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(7) — 4 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. S. M., 323 P.3d 947 (Or. 2014).
State v. A. L. M., 220 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. A.B., 401 P.3d 279 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Alm, 220 P.3d 449 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(7)(a)(A) — 3 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. J. L. J., 226 P.3d 112 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
L. D. v. T. J. T., 360 P.3d 746 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
Dept. of Human Servs. v. P. I. M., 341 Or. App. 182 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(7)(b) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. R. R., 322 Or. App. 427 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.337(l)(b) — 2 cases
Dep't of Human Servs. v. A. D. D. B., 375 P.3d 575 (Lane Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016).
Dep't of Human Servs. v. D. M. T., 243 P.3d 836 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
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.