Skip to content
Name: In re Christian K.
Case #: A151695
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 03/21/2018

Juvenile court did not err by ordering overseas trip for minor, even if the minor would have benefited from additional therapy before going. Parental rights to the minor were terminated. Paternal grandparents, who live in Denmark, expressed interest in adopting the minor. The Department recommended weekly therapy for the minor to work on his relationship with his grandmother. The therapy was interrupted because of the foster family’s unwillingness to provide transportation. Grandmother scheduled a month-long visit for the minor to visit her in Denmark prior to a permanent move. The juvenile court ordered the visit, and the minor appealed. The minor argued that the juvenile court failed to exercise its discretion when it denied his request to postpone his trip to Denmark until he received additional therapy. He argued in the alternative that insufficient evidence supported the finding that he received reasonable services. The appellate court rejected the arguments and affirmed. When a juvenile court orders a permanent plan of adoption, the court is required to retain jurisdiction over the child until the child is adopted. It is required to assess the adequacy of services and is authorized to make orders to protect the stability of the child and to facilitate a permanent placement and adoption, even where services have been inadequate. The juvenile court was not required to find that the minor’s services were reasonable before it could order a trip to Denmark. Here, the court’s approval of the overseas trip was proper under section 366.3, subdivision (g) to protect the minor’s stability and to facilitate and expedite his adoption.