DECEMBER 2024 | VOLUME 1 ISSUE 6 | | |
|
|
Reminders:
Join our Practice Resources page! Register here and email kim.rebsamen@laok.org to be granted access.
All current and active cases should be entered into LegalServer.
Check out our Training and Events Calendar! Now included on our calendar are our past recorded trainings.
| | |
|  |
|
|
Don’t Forget to Litigate
Timothy Michaels-Johnson, acting director while Gwendolyn Clegg is on annual leave
When evaluating the skills of an attorney dedicated to child welfare law, we often envision someone who has mastered a unique combination of subject matter expertise, strategic thinking, and empathy. While these qualities are vital, we must also emphasize the attorney’s role as a litigator. The child welfare system operates as an adversarial system, balancing the rights and interests of the parent, the child, and the State (and, importantly, the tribe when the Indian Child Welfare Act applies). These rights and interests frequently conflict, requiring attorneys to advocate zealously for their client’s position through litigation. Ultimately, it is the judge, after hearing the litigation of all parties, who determines what serves the best interests of the child.
While out-of-court advocacy holds significant value, we must not underestimate the importance of effective litigation in open court. For every hearing—whether adjudication, disposition, review, or permanency—attorneys must be prepared to litigate for their client’s desired outcomes. Read More
| |
|
STATE LAW AND DHS POLICY BOTH REQUIRE WRITTEN INDIVIDUALIZED SERVICE PLANS FOR CHILDREN, Tamera Reuber
Pursuant to 10A O.S. §1-4-704 the Department of Human Services or licensed child-placing agency shall prepare and maintain a written individualized service plan for any child that has been adjudicated to being a deprived child. The following are the highlights of 10A O.S. §1-4-704 as it pertains to the child’s ISP.
The ISP shall be based on a comprehensive assessment and evaluation of the child and family and shall be developed with the participation of the parent(s), the attorney for the child, the GAL (if any), the child’s tribe, and the child, if appropriate. The health and safety of the child shall be the paramount consideration in the development of the plan. The ISP shall be furnished to the court within thirty (30) days after the child’s adjudication and shall be made available to counsel for the parties and any applicable tribe. When approved by the Court, the ISP shall be incorporated and made a part of the dispositional order of the Court.
Every ISP shall be individualized and specific to each child. It shall be measurable, realistic, and consistent with the requirements of other Court orders. The child’s ISP shall include but is not limited to: Read More
| |
Mother asserted her right to a jury trial. She had notice of the hearing but failed to appear timely. Her counsel was present and called the hallway without a response. The trial judge dismissed the jury pool and converted the termination hearing to a nonjury trial. Mother appeared late. COCA found Mother’s tardiness did not expressly waive her right to a jury trial, particularly given that the court failed to make a determination about whether or not Mother’s late arrival was without good cause. The court abused its discretion in converting the jury trial and the case was remanded. | |
In Re K.J., K.J., T.J., and T.J. | Mother alleged the state failed to present sufficient evidence to terminate her parental rights, the trial court erred by not providing her with services, and the trial court was biased. Mother was terminated based on 10A O.S. 1-4-904 for shocking and heinous abuse and neglect. Essentially her argument was that the state did not present evidence regarding all the kinds of shocking and heinous abuse or neglect listed (such as sexual abuse) and thus did not meet the criteria to be able to immediately terminate her rights without first providing her with reasonable efforts. COCA found that to terminate Read More | |
|
Trauma-Informed Practice, Katy Fortune
One of the fundamentals of quality legal representation is engaging in trauma-informed practice. Being trauma informed means understanding the pervasive nature of individual, generational, historical, racial, and systemic trauma and the impact it has on a person’s mental, emotional, and physical functioning. Applying a trauma-informed lens to your practice means asking “What happened to you?” rather than “What’s wrong with you?” in client interactions. It also means recognizing and reflecting on how your view of yourself and the world influences your interpretation of the things that happen to you and others, as well as your relationships and interactions with them. Being trauma informed avoids re-traumatizing clients and promotes healing and recovery, which increases client engagement and collaboration.
| |
|
Region 2 parent mentor James Ray had the opportunity to network with stakeholders from across the country at the Children’s Trust Fund Alliance’s (CTFA) Annual Gathering last month in Phoenix! The CTFA is a national organization that aids state children’s trust and prevention funds by promoting and supporting a system of services, laws, practices, and attitudes that support and strengthen families and communities to prevent child abuse and neglect. The CTFA is one of several state and national organizations in which James is actively involved as a parent partner/advisor. We are incredibly fortunate to have him as one of our parent mentors! | |
|
Region 2 is thrilled to announce that we have contracted with our first youth mentor! McKinzie (Kinzie) Venzor has roots in Region 2 and is excited to help support children and youth in custody by ensuring they know their rights and are connected with their attorneys. Kinzie will be available to serve child and youth clients in Cleveland and Pottawatomie counties. Welcome to OFR, Kinzie! | |
|
Shoutout to Terry Allen, Dodi Duffield, and Kathy Baker!
This amazing team was able to get a petition dismissed for untimely filing, AND had the subsequent request for removal of the children denied!
This case relied heavily on ICWA and they did a wonderful job protecting the rights of this family.
| |
|
Shoutout to Rana Womack!
Rana Womack received high praise from Alicia Bales, the Child Welfare District Director for Judicial District 3.
Alicia states that they had a teenager with a blown placement who was very upset and asked to speak to her attorney. It was late in the afternoon, but Rana answered and promptly went to the DHS office and sat with her child client for over 3 hours until a new placement could be found. She was extremely patient with her client, listened to her client's concerns, helped calm her client down, and gained her client's trust much more than any of the child welfare workers had been able to do.
By the time they found a new placement for the child, the child understood what was happening and was happy. Rana went above and beyond with this client!
| |
|
Shoutout to Stephanie Robinson, Rodney Fergason, and the Grady County team!
Lacey Warren and Tim Scott observed a morning docket in Grady County. Things went very well and they were both super impressed by the atmosphere, the collaboration, and the knowledge of the attorneys present. They told us that it was fabulous to see the attorneys prepared and working especially hard to advocate for their clients.
They relayed that "Stephanie Robinson appeared to have direct, personal knowledge of her child clients, which was so refreshing!" All of the parent's attorneys present had an excellent knowledge of their clients' cases, but it was the last case that morning where the advocacy really came through, and Lacey said "I was especially gratified to see Rodney Fergason go to great lengths to ensure his client received excellent representation."
We appreciate your hard work!
| | | | |
