In re the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: A. M. F., J. G.-T. N., and C. L. B., Parents.
Beltrami County District Court File No. 04-JV-18-1233
J.M. Dawson, Groshek Law, (for appellant great grandmother
L. Hanson, Beltrami County Attorney, Elysia Nguyen, Assistant
County Attorney, (for respondent Beltrami County)
Hernandez, International Falls, (for respondent guardian ad
Considered and decided by Reyes, Presiding Judge; Smith,
Tracy M., Judge; and Florey, Judge.
plain language of Minn. Stat. § 260C.607, subd. 6(a)(1)
(2018), requires a relative or foster parent to have, at the
time the relative or foster parent moves for an order for
adoptive placement, a completed adoption home study under
Minn. Stat. § 259.41 (2018), approving the relative or
foster parent for adoption.
appeal from the district court's denial of her motion for
permanent adoptive placement, appellant L.O., the maternal
great grandmother of the children at issue, E.D.F. and
E.M.F., argues that the district court erred in concluding
that Minn. Stat. § 260C.607, subd. 6(a)(1), required her
to have a completed home study at the time she filed the
motion because, according to appellant, the home study was
not due until the time of placement. We affirm.
February 2017, respondent Beltrami County Health and Human
Services (BCHHS) received a report that A.M.F., the mother of
E.D.F. and E.M.F., was under the influence of drugs.
Following a welfare check by law enforcement, the children
were placed in out-of-home care, and a relative search was
conducted. In April 2017, appellant responded to the relative
search, stating that she could not be a placement option due
to her and her husband's health concerns.
April 2018, BCHHS filed a petition for termination of
parental rights. The district court granted the petition and
transferred guardianship and legal custody of the children to
the commissioner of human services. At the time, E.D.F. and
E.M.F. were staying in a pre-adoptive relative home with
their maternal great aunt, R.F. However, in August 2018,
BCHHS was notified that R.F. was using drugs, and,
consequently, the children were moved out of R.F.'s home
and transferred to a new foster-care placement.
September 2018, BCHHS informed appellant that it was
considering a non-relative-adoptive placement. At a review
hearing on October 30, 2018, appellant expressed an interest
in adoption. A few days later, appellant and her husband met
with BCHHS case manager, Jody Wilkinson. During the meeting,
appellant expressed her desire to be considered as an
adoptive option for the children. Due to appellant's
stated interest, BCHHS sent a home-study referral to North
Homes. North ...