Opinion ID: 2365068
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Dependency and Neglect Proceeding Representation

Text: We begin our examination of the right to counsel in a termination of parental rights proceeding by considering the right to counsel, if any, at the first stage of the dependency and neglect continuum. When Lassiter v. Department of Social Services was decided twenty years ago, the United States Supreme Court noted that wise public policy ... may require that higher standards be adopted than those minimally tolerable under the [United States] Constitution. [4] It then noted that [i]nformed opinion has clearly come to hold that an indigent parent is entitled to the assistance of appointed counsel not only in parental termination proceedings, but [also] in dependency and neglect proceedings as well.  [5] In 1995, Delaware was awarded a federal grant to assess and improve Delaware's child welfare system. This program provided the first opportunity for systematic study of the court's handling of child welfare cases and present[ed] a challenge for Delaware to take the important steps to reform. [6] The grant was administered by the National Children's Bureau in conjunction with several non-profit organizations. [7] It demonstrated a trend at the national level to improve outcomes for children who are in foster care by instituting timely decision-making, judicial oversight and informed permanency decisions. [8] In May 1997, this Court released the findings and recommendations that resulted from the Delaware Court Improvement Project grant. [9] One of those final recommendations was that every indigent parent and child should have representation in child welfare proceedings from the inception of a dependency and neglect proceeding. [10] At about the same time, the United States Congress passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA). Upon its passage, the ASFA mandated that a child's health and safety shall be the paramount concern and that the State should be making timely permanency decisions for children. [11] The ASFA aspires to achieve permanency for children by speeding up the entire welfare process out of a concern that too many children in [the United States] are spending the most important formative years in a legal limbo. [12] Except in limited circumstances, states are required to file for the termination of parental rights for any child who has been in state foster care for fifteen out of the last twenty-two months in order to qualify for federal funding. [13] The ASFA also requires that each state formulate a system for conducting a permanency hearing for each child, once the child has been in state foster care for twelve months. [14] The purpose of the permanency hearing is to approve a permanency plan for the child that includes whether, and if applicable when, the child will be returned to the parent, placed for adoption and the State will file a petition for termination of parental rights, or referred for legal guardianship, or ... placed in another planned permanent living arrangement.... [15] This Court has acknowledged the rights of children to have timely permanency decisions made on their behalf and to be heard in proceedings where their vital interests are at stake. [16] Inextricably intertwined with the goal of achieving permanency for children is the issue of legal representation for all parties in child welfare proceedings, preferably ab initio when a child enters foster care. The ASFA mandates that states develop a system to provide legal representation for children in dependency and neglect proceedings. That legal representation is provided for Delaware children who are in foster care, indirectly, by the attorneys for each CASA and, directly, by the recent statutory establishment of the Office of the Child Advocate. [17] The enabling legislation requires that the Office of the Child Advocate implement a program of legal representation for Delaware's abused, neglected and dependent children. [18] Legal representation in a dependency and neglect proceeding is provided for the DFS at State expense by Deputy Attorneys General. Consequently, at the present time, the only parties to a dependency and neglect proceeding who are not provided with representation are the indigent parents. The Guidelines for Public Policy and State Legislation Governing Permanence for Children (Guidelines), however, specifically recommend that [s]tates guarantee that counsel represent biological parents (or legal guardians) at all court hearings, including at the preliminary protective proceeding. Such representation should be provided at government expense when the parent or guardian is indigent. [19] The Guidelines also state the following: Children's interests are not well served unless all parties have good legal representation. Courts face difficult decisions about how best to protect children, and judges need to be confident that they are reaching the best-informed decision about a child's future. Given that attorneys and other advocates often determine what information a judge is presented with, it is vital that all parties in child abuse and neglect cases have adequate access to competent representation so that judges can make informed decisions. [20] The indigent parents of children who have been placed in foster care are not only without economic resources but are also often dysfunctional, usually due to parental substance abuse. [21] Children cannot be safely and successfully reunited with their parents unless the conditions that led to the judicial determination of dependency and neglect are corrected permanently. Respected authorities have concluded that it is unrealistic to expect that these already challenged indigent parents will turn their lives around, especially on the accelerated ASFA time table, without an attorney to advocate their need for the reunification resources that are available through the DFS. [22] Today, more than one-half of the states have established a right for indigent parents to be represented by counsel at State expense in dependency and neglect proceedings. [23] That right has been recognized in those states by statutory enactments or as a matter of state constitutional law. [24] It is not mandated by the United States Constitution. [25] As noted earlier, the Delaware Court Improvement Project concluded that it was advisable for all parties to have legal representation in dependency and neglect proceedings. [26] Although the General Assembly has not enacted a statute establishing such a right for indigent parents, it has begun to provide limited funding to the Family Court for the purpose of appointing attorneys to represent indigent parents in dependency and neglect proceedings. During the last two years, this Court has approved IOLTA [27] grants to the Community Legal Aid Society to administer contracts that provide representation for indigent parents in dependency and neglect proceedings in Kent and Sussex Counties. In its amicus curiae brief, the Office of the Child Advocate makes a forceful argument that indigent Delaware parents should have a state constitutional right to counsel in all child dependency and neglect proceedings. [28] This Court has never decided whether an indigent parent has a right to counsel in a dependency and neglect proceeding under the Delaware Constitution. That question is not before us in this case, because the record reflects that the parents were represented during the dependency and neglect proceeding by a private attorney they apparently retained at their own expense.