Dept. of Human Services v. R. A. C.-R.

Where there is no feasible way to supply a program to a parent, DHS is not required to provide such a service in an effort to reunify a parent with a child because this would leave a child in limbo. See Dept. of Human Services v. K. G. T., 306 Or. App. 368, 381, _ P.3d _ (2020).

Father appealed a judgment that altered the permanency plan regarding his two children from reunification to guardianship. Father assigned error to the lower court’s determination that DHS made reasonable efforts to reunify him with his children. Father argued DHS never provided him with a meaningful opportunity to become a sufficient parent because DHS never offered him any domestic violence programs. DHS argued that reasonable efforts were made based on the circumstances of the case. Where there is no feasible way to supply a program to a parent, DHS is not required to provide such a service in an effort to reunify a parent with a child because this would leave a child in limbo. See Dept. of Human Services v. K. G. T., 306 Or. App. 368, 381, _ P.3d _ (2020). The Court held that DHS made reasonable efforts to provide Father with services. DHS repeatedly tried to figure out what services were available to Father in Mexico but overall, DHS had no control of programs offered. Therefore, no feasible options were available to DHS. Affirmed.