In Re Gerald J.

San Diego County Department of Social Services v. Gerald J.

Bad Law
1 Cal. App. 4th 1180·2 Cal. Rptr. 2d 569
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 21, 1991D013266California5,503 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Froehlich, J.

*1183 Opinion

Minor Gerald J. appeals a permanency planning order of the juvenile court specifying long-term foster care for Mm and adoption for Ms younger brother Jimmy J. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 1 § 366.26). We affirm.

Facts

Gerald was bom on September 24,1977, and Jimmy was bom on May 22, 1986. On March 5, 1989, their parents had a violent confrontation. Apparently, the mother drank and instigated fights with the father. The minors were sometimes present during the fights, and Gerald protected Jimmy. After the March 5 confrontation, the police found narcotics on the television in the motel room in wMch the family was residing. They arrested the parents. The minors were taken to Hillcrest Receiving Home.

On March 7, 1989, a petition was filed under section 300, subdivision (b) on behalf of Gerald and Jimmy. It alleged they were exposed to violent confrontations between their parents. The juvenile court referee ordered the minors detained at Hillcrest Receiving Home, a licensed foster home or adjunct, and said they need not be separated. Gerald was placed in New Alternatives and Jimmy was placed in a foster home. Gerald began counseling on March 15. On April 3, Dr. Terrazas…

concurrence Opinion

Nares, J.

I concur in the result, based upon my interpretation of the relevant statutes mandating the major consideration in this case must focus on Jimmy’s best interests. However, I write separately because I *1189 am concerned with the majority’s broad statement that juvenile law expresses no affirmative duty to keep siblings together. (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 1187.) I disagree with this broad statement because I believe that family relationships, whether parent-and-child or sibling, are equally important in our society. (As Father Flanagan’s Boys Town motto states, “He ain’t heavy, Father. He’s my brother!” (Oursler & Oursler, Father Flanagan of Boys Town (1949) p. 170.)) I would not relieve the juvenile court from an affirmative duty to keep siblings together whenever possible.

Here, this was not possible. Further delays in obtaining stability for Jimmy would not benefit anyone. Where, as here, siblings cannot be placed together, the juvenile court should, however, encourage and promote a continuing sibling relationship between Jimmy and his brother Gerald.

Appellant’s petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied March 12, 1992. Mosk, J., was of the opinion that the petition…

Opinion

Minor Gerald J. appeals a permanency planning order of the juvenile court specifying long-term foster care for him and adoption for his younger brother Jimmy J. (Welf. & Inst. Code, [1] § 366.26). We affirm.

Gerald was born on September 24, 1977, and Jimmy was born on May 22, 1986. On March 5, 1989, their parents had a violent confrontation. Apparently, the mother drank and instigated fights with the father. The minors were sometimes present during the fights, and Gerald protected Jimmy. After the March 5 confrontation, the police found narcotics on the television in the motel room in which the family was residing. They arrested the parents. The minors were taken to Hillcrest Receiving Home.

On March 7, 1989, a petition was filed under section 300, subdivision (b) on behalf of Gerald and Jimmy. It alleged they were exposed to violent confrontations between their parents. The juvenile court referee ordered the minors detained at Hillcrest Receiving Home, a licensed foster home or adjunct, and said they need not be separated. Gerald was placed in New Alternatives and Jimmy was placed in a foster home. Gerald began counseling on March 15. On April 3, Dr.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.