§4 ch2: Court Related Activities for Placement of Children

Attachment A:  The Juvenile Court and Other Legal Considerations

Purpose and Mission of the Court

As designated by the Juvenile Code, the purpose of the juvenile court is to "facilitate the care, protection and discipline of children who come within the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court."  The Code also states that the law should be "liberally construed" which permits a great deal of discretionary power. Based on the law, the mission of the court is to ensure that "each child coming within the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court shall receive such care, guidance and control, preferably in his own home, as will conduce to the child’s welfare and the best interests of the state..." (RSMo 211.011)

Jurisdiction of the Court

The juvenile court has exclusive jurisdiction over children under 17 years of age. In cases where a child has been determined to be abused or neglected, jurisdiction can be extended to children under 18 years of age.

Another exception may occur for a child between the ages of 14 and 17 who has committed an offense which would be considered a felony if committed by an adult. The child may then be certified as an adult and tried in the circuit court.

Once the juvenile court has asserted jurisdiction, the court may retain jurisdiction until the child has reached the age of twenty-one. Its authority over adults is limited to the following circumstances:

Any other punitive action against the parents or other custodian must be taken through the circuit court.

The Hearing Process

The first step in the hearing process, after the court is informed that a child appears to be under the jurisdiction of the court, is for the court to hold a preliminary inquiry to determine the facts and whether the interests of the public or of the child require further action. Based upon that inquiry the court may make an informal adjustment or authorize the juvenile officer to file a petition.

The types of hearings which the court may hold include:

Witnesses and Records

When the court receives a referral, at times the juvenile and/or parent will deny the report. When this occurs, a contested hearing is set and witnesses are subpoenaed. Witnesses may include school personnel, medical personnel, the police, Children’s Division (CD) staff, etc. In order to introduce evidence contained in the records of these witnesses, it must be done under the Uniform Business Records Act. This is an exception to the Hearsay Rule. In order to comply with the Act it is necessary that:

These records may also be admissible without the testimony of the custodian if they are filed with the proper affidavit.

Supreme Court rule 123.08 requires the Children’s Division and the Juvenile Officer to provide access to records and information within specific time frames without a formal discovery request. Within ten (10) days of the protective custody hearing or within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the petition or motion to modify, the Children’s Division and Juvenile Officer must allow for certain records to be made available to all parties. The records may include the following and should be relevant to the allegations in the petition:

CD must also make available to all parties any new relevant information related to the allegations obtained within ten (10) days of receipt. This rule only requires CD to make available completed documents in their case record. The rule does not require CD to request additional records not currently in its possession for any other party.

Staff are not required to have a release of information form signed by the parents to release information related to the allegations pursuant to a request made under this rule as long as there is an order of appointment by the court or entry of appearance made by the attorney. However, a signed release of information form is required to release confidential materials regarding the parents’ protected health information or materials not covered in the rule.

The rule states that CD must make these materials available for all parties, thus staff should have their case files ready for review within the specified timeframes. The rule does not require CD to make copies of the information. Staff may schedule an appointment for the party to review the relevant information in the record. If the party or attorney would like copies of the documents, they may provide a written or verbal request. If copies of the information are requested, the Children’s Division must follow the timeframes established in this rule as this rule supersedes the CD policy which allows ten (10) days to prepare the case file. Only one copy per party will be made. Any additional copies will be made at the expense of the person requesting the copy.

The Expert Witness

CD staff may be required to testify in court, either to the facts of a case or in the role of an expert witness. Opinions and inferences of an expert witness are admissible when it has been established that the witness is professionally acquainted with, skilled, or trained in some field (i.e., child welfare, child custody) and therefore has knowledge or experience in matters generally not familiar to the public. For this reason, prior to testimony, CD staff may be asked to state their educational background, experience, etc. While CD staff may testify to matters which pertain to "the best interests of the child," they are generally not qualified to testify to matters beyond their scope of expertise such as medical opinions, mental condition/diagnosis of the parent, etc.

Legal Rights

Certain legal rights in terms of the integrity of the family have been established by the Supreme Court via the process of legislative review. In general, these rights have been incorporated into state statutes. Such rights include, but are not limited to:

Rights of the Child and Family

Family law, within the context of protective services and custody, is based upon the English Common Laws principle of "Parens Patriae."  Under the doctrine of "parens patriae," a court of equity exercising the Crown’s paternal prerogative, could declare a child a ward of the Crown when the parents had failed to maintain the child’s welfare.

Modern legal interpretation focuses on the sanctity of the family. The court is empowered to protect "the best interests of the child."  In this context, the court will place substantial weight on the following considerations:

Parental Responsibilities

The integrity of the family is protected by both legal and ethical rights. Parents have responsibilities as well as rights. When the welfare of the child is endangered, the state assumes the right to intervene. Children have a need for love, care, and protection. Within their ability and available resources, parents have a responsibility to provide:

Related Subject:  Section 1 Chapter 2 Roles and Responsibilities of Parents and Their Children

Invasion of Privacy

The state’s obligation to protect children from harm is balanced by the family’s right to privacy. This obligation is predicated on the assumption that investigations are conducted under certain general guidelines:

Standards for Child Protection Services

The following guidelines should be encompassed in providing services to families served by CD. In the course of service delivery, such guidelines will serve the CD Children’s Service Worker well in respecting the integrity of the family, maintaining a professional demeanor, and assisting the family to provide for the best interests of the child:

------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgment:  Raymond Legg, Attorney, Missouri Division of Legal Services, reviewed this chapter and supplied information.

Sources:
Professional Liability:  Schwitzgebel, Robert L. and Schwitzgebel, R. Kirkland; Law and Psychological Practice; New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1980

Child Welfare League of America, Standards For Child Protective Services, New York, New York: 1980

National Committee for Prevention of Child Abuse, Child Abuse and the Law: A Legal Primer for Social Workers, New York, New York: 1980

Schwitzgebel, Robert L. and Schwitzgebel R. Kirkland, Law and Psychological Practice. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1980

Chapter Memoranda History: (prior to 1/31/07)

Memoranda History