Department of Human Services v. T.L.H.S.

When it comes to a jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court’s focus must be “on the child’s conditions or circumstances at the time of the hearing and whether the totality of those circumstances demonstrates a reasonable likelihood of harm to the welfare of the child.” Dept. of Human Services v. W. A. C., 263 Or App 382 (2014)

Mother appealed the judgment of the court asserting dependency jurisdiction over the child. Mother assigned error to the findings of a mental health condition that was no longer present when the court made when the decision to assert jurisdiction over the child. On appeal, Mother argued that, at the time of the jurisdictional hearing, her mental health had substantially improved, she regretted how she handled the situation and knew how to handle future situations if they were to occur. In response, DHS argued that the mother’s history of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse were circumstances that showed an inability to appropriately respond to the child’s “future requests for help.” When it comes to a jurisdictional hearing, the juvenile court’s focus must be “on the child’s conditions or circumstances at the time of the hearing and whether the totality of those circumstances demonstrates a reasonable likelihood of harm to the welfare of the child.” Dept. of Human Services v. W. A. C., 263 Or App 382 (2014). The Court held that there was insufficient evidence presented by DHS that showed that the mother’s current condition demonstrated a likelihood of harm to the child. Reversed.