419B.337 Commitment to custody of Department of Human Services.
- (1) When the court determines it would be in the best interest and for the welfare of a ward, the court may place the ward in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services for care, placement and supervision. When the court enters an order removing a ward from the ward’s home or an order continuing care, the court shall make a written finding as to whether:
- (a) Removal of the ward from the ward’s home or continuation of care is in the best interest and for the welfare of the ward;
- (b) Reasonable efforts, considering the circumstances of the ward and parent, have been made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the ward from the home or to make it possible for the ward to safely return home. In making this finding, the court shall consider the ward’s health and safety the paramount concerns; and
- (c) Diligent efforts have been made to place the ward pursuant to ORS 419B.192.
- (2) The court may specify the particular type of care, supervision or services to be provided by the Department of Human Services to wards placed in the department’s custody and to the parents or guardians of the wards, but the actual planning and provision of such care, supervision or services is the responsibility of the department. The department may place the ward in a child care center authorized to accept the ward.
- (3) The court may make an order regarding visitation by the ward’s parents or siblings. The Department of Human Services is responsible for developing and implementing a visitation plan consistent with the court’s order.
- (4) Uniform commitment blanks, in a form approved by the Director of Human Services, shall be used by all courts for placing wards in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services.
- (5) If the ward has been placed in the custody of the Department of Human Services, the court shall make no commitment directly to any residential facility, but shall cause the ward to be delivered into the custody of the department at the time and place fixed by rules of the department. A ward so committed may not be placed in a Department of Corrections institution.
- (6) Commitment of a ward to the Department of Human Services continues until dismissed by the court or until the ward becomes 21 years of age.
- (7) A court may dismiss commitment of a ward to the Department of Human Services if:
- (A) Dismissal is appropriate because the ward has been safely reunited with a parent or because a safe alternative to reunification has been implemented for the ward; and
- (B) The ward is at least 14 years of age but less than 21 years of age and the court finds that:
- (i) The department has provided case planning pursuant to ORS 419B.343 that addresses the ward’s needs and goals for a successful transition to independent living, including needs and goals relating to housing, physical and mental health, education, employment, community connections and supportive relationships;
- (ii) The department has provided appropriate services pursuant to the case plan;
- (iii) The department has involved the ward in the development of the case plan and in the provision of appropriate services; and
- (iv) The ward has safe and stable housing and is unlikely to become homeless as a result of dismissal of commitment of the ward to the department; or
- (b) The ward has been committed to the custody of the Oregon Youth Authority.
[1993 c.33 §108; 1993 c.546 §129; 1999 c.859 §10; 2003 c.396 §57; 2005 c.679 §1; 2007 c.806 §6]
- Adams v. SOSCF, 131 Or App 396 1994 Lane County
- State v. A.L.M., 232 Or App 13 2009 Lane County
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Brown, 175 Or App. 1 2001 Benton County
- Dept. of Human Services v. B.W., 249 Or App 123 2012 Union County
- Dept. of Human Services v. D.M.T., 239 Or App 127 2010, rev den, 349 Or 654 (2011) Linn County
- State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. D.T.C., 231 Or App 544 2009 Josephine County
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. G.L., 220 Or App 216, rev den, 345 Or 158 2008 Linn County
- State ex rel Dept. of Human Services v. Guldager, 187 Or App 543 2003 Clackamas County
- Dept. of Human Services v. J.L.J., 233 Or App 544, 2010 Clackamas County
- Dept. Human Services v. J.R.F., ____ Or App ____, 2011 Clackamas County
- State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Kopp, 180 Or App 566 2002 Multnomah County
- State ex rel SOSCF v. Mitchell, 182 Or App 402 2002 Clackamas County