Opinion ID: 2555358
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: DFS Explores Additional Placement Options

Text: Before she moved to Connecticut, Brown had maintained regular visitation with Daniel on a weekly basis. After she left in June 2008, however, Brown only attended two office visits with Daniel, in August 2008 and in November 2008. Her relocation was a major barrier to reunification. Indeed, Brown herself testified that it was unlikely that her Connecticut housing arrangement would be approved by Connecticut's Interstate Compact on Placement of Children (ICPC) office. [6] Having already ruled out Klein as a placement option, DFS began investigating whether Daniel could be placed with any other of Brown's relatives. [7] Brown identified Susan Knowles, a relative living in Connecticut, as a potential placement option. Diffendall attempted to contact Knowles, but Knowles never responded. [8] Brown later informed DFS that Knowles was no longer a placement option. DFS also tried to determine whether Brown's mother, who lived in Connecticut and was caring for Brown's oldest son, was a placement option. When Diffendall attempted to contact Brown and her mother to explain the ICPC housing assessment process, both Brown and her mother became hostile and refused to give Diffendall the needed information. Diffendall followed up with a letter requesting more information, but neither Brown nor her mother responded. In addition, DFS explored placing Daniel with Vanessa Childs, Brown's friend who lived in Connecticut. Because Childs was not a relative, an ICPC study would not have been approved; therefore, DFS did not further pursue this placement option. Finally, DFS also searched for Daniel's unknown father. [9] Although Brown mentioned Kevin Buckley as a potential father, she had no contact information for him. DFS's attempts to reach Buckley via publication were unsuccessful, and no one claiming to be Daniel's father ever contacted DFS.