Source: http://www.childrenslegalrightsjournal.com/childrenslegalrightsjournal/volume_34_issue_2?pg=52
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 22:52:27+00:00

Document:
Although using the courts as a filter in this way ensures a case-by-case evaluation of the appropriateness of information being disclosed to certain parties or the general public, it may also hinder accountability. If the majority of requests go through the courts, access to records may be delayed as a result of the time required to petition the court for such access. In contrast, South Dakota offers a more balanced approach, allowing a court to order the public release of confidential information by an authorized recipient, such as a physician or foster parent. 149 This allows a variety of enumerated persons and agencies to access the records for necessary purposes, but also provides an option for those individuals and the public to appeal for public disclosure.
145 See, e.g., LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 46:56(F)(8)(b) (2013); MONT. CODE ANN. § 41-3-205(2) (West 2013); NEV. REV. STAT. ANN. § 432B.290(1)(e) (West 2013).
146 KAN. STAT. ANN. § 38-2212(e), (f)(2) (West 2013).
147 N.C. GEN. STAT. ANN. § 7B-2901(a) (West 2013). West Virginia allows access to records pursuant to court order provided that the court reviews the records for relevancy and materiality, and may limit the use of such records. W. VA. CODE ANN. § 49-7-1(b)(4) (West 2013).
148 N.C. GEN. STAT. ANN. § 7B-2901(a)(1)-(4).
149 S.D. CODIFIED LAWS § 26-8A-13 (2013).
150 OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 5153.17 (West 2013).
151 R.I. GEN. LAWS ANN. § 42-72-8(b)(3) (West 2013).
152 OR. REV. STAT. ANN. § 419B.035(3) (West 2013).

References: § 46
 § 41
 § 432
 § 38
 § 7
 § 49
 § 7
 § 26
 § 5153
 § 42
 § 419