Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Brenda S.

We hold in this case that the statutory preference for placement of a dependent child with a relative (Welf. & Inst. Code, *277 § 361.3) 1 does not apply to a placement made as part of a permanent plan for adoption. Once the juvenile court determines that reunification efforts have failed, the only statutory preference in the adoption process is for a “relative caretaker or foster parent” as provided in subdivision (k) of section 366.26.

Facts

In January 1993, the Department of Children and Family Services took 15-month-old Sarah S. into protective custody. In March, the juvenile court found that Sarah’s mother (Brenda S.) and father (John B.) were unable to care for Sarah, 2 declared Sarah to be a dependent of the court and, in May, placed Sarah with her maternal grandfather, Edmund S., Sr., and Edmund’s wife, Darlene S. 3 In July, Edmund and Darlene obtained DCFS’s permission to have Lorey K. provide “baby-sitting” services for Sarah. As will appear, it was not until much later that DCFS and the juvenile court discovered that, from the outset, Sarah’s grandparents ignored the juvenile court’s orders and delegated responsibility for virtually all of Sarah’s care to…