[excited2adoptsoon]

Does anyone know if family members (say a grandparent) have the same or less chance of gaining custody of a child after TPR has occurred rather than before?

[millie58]

not sure about now but if the family members knew about kids coming into care and weren't able, I don't think they'd gain rights after TPR. However (this happened with a friend of mine), her parents didn't know her son was in the process of being adopted. they were able to get him. I guess it depends on how involved they've been since the kids came into care.

[AmahMama]

None. Rights are terminated for the parent and the whole bio family. The adoptive parents still have to be approved by the state/county/agency, etc.

Hope this helped.

[Boulderbabe]

AmahMama,

This isn't quite correct. In the first place, the bfamily's rights aren't terminated, because they never HAD legal rights in the first place. Only parents have legal rights.

Courts and DSS sometimes have preferences for placing kids with bfamily. That's a department policy and a judicial philosophy, not a law. So it varies dramatically from place to place and judge to judge.

In general, once a kid has been with a foster family for a long period of time, the courts will be reluctant to move them to relatives they don't know. But this can vary from judge to judge pretty substantially. If the kids had a close relationship with these relatives before or if the kids haven't been in their current foster family for very long, then the bfamily will usually have preference. If the reverse is true, and the kids have been in the ffamily a long time and don't have any relationship with the relatives, preference is usually with the ffamily.

But this isn't always true. Some judges prefer biofamily at all costs. There is no way to predict.

[AmahMama]

Boulderbabe,
She said after tpr. Not during the process. I asked our worker - AFTER TPR when the parent's rights are terminated - the parent's family also have no familial rights. At least that is how it is here.

During the process of foster care and into TPR - anything goes. The judges can contradict themselves from one hearing to the next. I understood that the question was AFTER.

[Biblemom]

Originally Posted by AmahMama

Boulderbabe,
She said after tpr. Not during the process. I asked our worker - AFTER TPR when the parent's rights are terminated - the parent's family also have no familial rights. At least that is how it is here.

During the process of foster care and into TPR - anything goes. The judges can contradict themselves from one hearing to the next. I understood that the question was AFTER.

This is what I have been told as well.

[snc2007]

I was contacted recently about a little boy who was recently tpr'd. He had been with his fp's since birth for 18mos. but they were unable to adopt him. We submitted our homestudy but it never went to committee b/c his uncle came forward and wanted to adopt him. The cw told me they would make him "jump through hoops" to make sure he was serious and he did. The little boy is now with him - and he never expressed any interest until AFTER tpr. However, it is my impression that had the fp's wanted to adopt - the little boy would have most likely stayed with them.

[Lorraine123]

I was under the impression that once TPR occured on the parent, the extended family then had no legal rights.

[hkolln]

TPR is only done on biomom and biodad. This does not mean that family can't come forward...but it's up to the Judge to decide if placement will be moved.

When our daughters bioparents were both TPR'd (one by default, the other voluntarilly) it was not on us (she is hubbys bio niece) but on only the bioparents. You can't TPR someone whom had no rights to begin with. That was how it worked for us.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by AmahMama

Boulderbabe,
She said after tpr. Not during the process. I asked our worker - AFTER TPR when the parent's rights are terminated - the parent's family also have no familial rights. At least that is how it is here.

AmahMama,

It's the same everywhere in the United States, because parental rights are Constitutional rights. You can't terminate the rights of people who do not have them. Only the bmom and bdad have Constitutional legal rights that can be affected by TPR. Other relatives don't have any legal rights at all, and never did.

The Department of Social Services and the judge are as free to prefer biorelatives after TPR as they are before. Legally speaking, TPR doesn't change anything.

[Boulderbabe]

Originally Posted by Biblemom

This is what I have been told as well.

Biblemom,

Either you were told wrong, or you misunderstood. Relatives have no legal rights to custody or visitation, and never did.

[Biblemom]

Our social worker told us that once bio parents rights are terminated so are the family's. She might have been speaking of our specific case and of specific family members that have been involved. Sorry if I cause confusion.

[hkolln]

Originally Posted by Biblemom

Our social worker told us that once bio parents rights are terminated so are the family's. She might have been speaking of our specific case and of specific family members that have been involved. Sorry if I cause confusion.

Maybe the SW meant after TPR they won't look at placement with relatives? Only bioparents have legal rights...extended family have NO legal rights therefore there are no rights to terminate. It doesn't matter what case you are speaking of. It should be the same across the board.

[AmahMama]

The way I understand it - after TPR - relatives have no more standing than any other potential adoptive parents that may be on the list.

If the child is not going to stay where he is - in the fp's home where the fc is bonded - then extended family have the same standing as any other potential adoptive family. A judge may order, or the adoptive committee, may give a preference to an extended family member that has not come forward before.

I have asked several other workers about this and, yes, tpr is only on parents rights because extended family has no rights, so go ahead and pick on the symantics of the wording. I believe the excited2adoptsoon was asking more about actual standing than rights.

After tpr happens, if a child is IN a home that is an (pre) concurrent - adoptive home - a stranger, familial relative (where there has been no cntact or interest before the TPR has already happened) will have no standing (or not supposed to) with the court and cannot interupt the adoptive process. "If the bio P has not appealed the tpr decision and a foster parent decides to adopt the foster child a relative will not be able to interrupt the process. If there has been an appeal filed the adoption process will not be completed until the appeal is decided. If the tpr decision is overturned by the Appeals Court then the whole case goes back to square one and relative placements can then be considered over the current foster parents."

This comes directly from my support liason that has adopted 4 children from foster care herself. She said if relatives were allowed to come into the picture after TPR has happened - and then try to get custody where it wasn't granted before - there would never be any finalization. I'm sure she is speaking of those relatives that have never spoken up (not like in hkolln's case). It is also my understanding that the dept's are to to do "due diligence" while the child is in foster care and before tpr is an option.

I believe the question is whether gpnts have a better chance of gaining custody after tpr - and my worker says - if the child has been in the foster home for long enough and the gpnt has not come forward or passed a case plan - no the gpnt wouldn't have any more standing or chance of custody than before - as the gpnt would still have to pass a homestudy etc.

Of course, judges, cw's, and the system all work in the good ole boy way - so actually, most anything could happen. I will definately conceed to that. It is supposed to be for the best interest of the child.

[bigtalker]

When I worked for CPS I was given the unfortunate task of taking a 16 month old out of the foster home she had been in since she was three days old and placing her with relatives in another state. This happened after tpr. I was told by my supervisor that this child deserved the right to grow up with family. The foster parents we devestated and I found the whole thing heart breaking. That is why I left the agency. After tpr family can come forward and it is up to the agency and the judge to decide if this is the right placement for the child.