DHS v. J.D.

When a juvenile court relies on facts concerning an “underlying cause” for jurisdiction, the underlying cause must be sufficiently identified in the jurisdictional judgment to provide a parent with the information needed to address the issue.  Dep’t. of Human Services v. C.E., 288 Or App 649, 658 (2017).

In consolidated dependency cases, Mother challenged the juvenile court’s judgment changing her children’s permanency plans to adoption. Mother challenged the juvenile court’s determination that she made insufficient progress to make it possible for her children to be reunified notwithstanding reasonable efforts made by the Department of Humans Services (“DHS”). DHS conceded that the juvenile court erred in its determination because the court’s reasoning did not relate to the basis for the court’s jurisdiction over the children.  When a juvenile court relies on facts concerning an “underlying cause” for jurisdiction, the underlying cause must be sufficiently identified in the jurisdictional judgment to provide a parent with the information needed to address the issue.  Dep’t. of Human Services v. C.E., 288 Or App 649, 658 (2017).  Because the jurisdictional judgment directed the mother to follow mental health and substance abuse treatment plans, but did not require completion of such treatments, the Court found the insufficient progress facts were extraneous to the basis for jurisdiction.  Reversed.