Court Opinion

ID: 9578116
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:41:47.742031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:22:42.104587
License: Public Domain

RABINOWITZ, Chief Justice,
concurring.
I agree with the court’s construction of AS 47.10.080(f) that a natural parent whose parental rights have been terminated has the right to a review of the order terminating parental rights upon a showing of good cause.
However, I would also grant a hearing to Rita T. to review the original termination order under the significantly stricter standards of the new statute, regardless of whether or not C. L. T. has now been adopted. The new statute became effective less than four months after the order terminating Rita T.’s parental rights was entered under the former statute.
In the Matter of J. M. and M. M., 573 P.2d 1376, 1378-79 (Alaska 1978), holds that the repeal of a former statute and adoption of a new statute with significantly stricter standards constitute good cause for review of a judgment of dependency, and that children adjudged dependent under AS 47.10.-010(a)(5) prior to its repeal are entitled to a hearing under the stricter standards of the new AS 47.10.010(a). Since under the court’s decision in the case at bar we have held that good-cause review is available in a termination case, I conclude that Rita T. is entitled to a hearing to review the termination of her parental rights under the standards of the new statute without regard to whether or not C. L. T. has been adopted prior to the hearing. In contrast with the “good cause” of Rita T.’s rehabilitation, the “good cause” justifying the hearing under the new standards is that she has the right to have the new standards applied to the original termination of her parental rights. Thus, the hearing I contemplate would determine whether or not the original termination was valid.