Court Opinion

ID: 9582252
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:24:12.924654+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:37:34.650848
License: Public Domain

LOCKEMY, J.,
concurring.
I concur with the majority’s holding that former foster parents who fail to administratively challenge the removal of their foster child do not have standing to initiate a private adoption action once DSS places the child into a different preadoptive home. I write separately, however, because I want to make clear that foster parents are not powerless against DSS when a foster child is removed. See S.C.Code Ann. Regs. 114-140(A)(1)(c) (Supp.2008) (allowing foster parents to challenge the removal of a child from their home).
In this State and, indeed in this country, we hold dear the right to have only those elected to office by the people hold sway over our activities through constitutionally permitted limits within laws passed, ratified, and signed into law. Sometimes the operation of state and federal agencies cause us great concern because although they are authorized by these duly enacted laws to take certain actions, there seems to be a shield between the people and the agency. This shield is an artificial one when an agency acts within the constraints of permitted statutes because the agency is carrying out the will of the people as authorized by its duly elected representatives. However, if the agency goes beyond its authorization or tries to exert power it does not and should not have, then we do not have government by the people but government taken from the people. Such is a dreaded concept that caused fear in philosophers like John Locke and Baron de Montesquieu, who believed in republican government based on the consent of the *420governed. Thus, it is imperative that our governmental acts are derived only from the people through legislative or constitutional authority.
This case troubles me because Appellants have lodged serious allegations against DSS concerning what the agency told them about Child’s new placement, and I do not believe we should discount those allegations when the family court made no factual findings in this regard. If true, the allegations made by Appellants against DSS would threaten to put that dangerous shield between the people and its government. Accordingly, I believe it is imperative to emphasize that foster parents can administratively challenge the removal of a foster child, so long as they lodge their challenge “within thirty (30) days of receiving notification of adverse action.” See S.C.Code Ann. Regs. 114-130(B)(1), 114-140(0(2) (Supp.2008). Here, if as alleged by Appellants, DSS personnel told them that they could bring Child to his new home and remain involved in his life, Appellants could have, upon realizing this was not the case, challenged the removal of Child. Appellants did not do so within the time allowed by statute and therefore have no standing to challenge the removal at this time. Under these circumstances, I agree with the majority and the family court’s determination that Appellants lack standing to initiate an adoption action.