Dept. of Human Services v. E.L.G.

A no-contact order between incestuous parents in a juvenile dependency case may only prohibit sexual contact under ORS 163.525, rather than no-contact whatsoever.

Father and mother (parents) appeal a judgment asserting jurisdiction over C, their two-month old child. Parents argue that the juvenile court erred by (1) determining that parents’ incestuous relationship posed a current risk of serious loss or injury to C, and (2) issuing a no-contact order between the parents. Mother is father’s adult, biological daughter. Parents began a sexual relationship resulting in the birth of two children, Z and C. Z was born with medical issues possibly linked to the parents’ genetic relationship and had been placed in foster care by DHS. At the time of C’s birth, DHS filed a dependency petition under ORS 419B.100(1)(c) alleging that parents’ criminal activity, substance abuse, living instability, and the strong potential for C’s cognitive deficiencies were sufficient for the court to assert jurisdiction over C. The Court refused to review whether the parents’ relationship status was grounds for the petition because the parents failed to preserve this argument. On review of the no-contact order, the Court found that the provisions were overly broad, and that the lower court could only have jurisdiction over a no-contact order regarding illegal sexual contact between the parents, but a full no-contact order was overbroad. Reversed and remanded on the no-contact order; otherwise affirmed.