PETERSON CHILD DEPEND NEGL v

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 12624 I N T E SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A H F F OTN 197 5 I N THE MATTER O DECLARING JONES AND F PETERSON CHILDREN DEPENDENT AND NEGLECTED CHILDREN DIVISION O CHILD WELFARE SERVICES F DEPARTMENT O PUBLIC WELFARE STATE O MONTANA, F F P e t i t i o n e r and Respondent, - -vs JUDY PETERSON, Respondent and Appellant. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , . Honorable Robert H Wilson, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel of Record: For Appellant : V. C. Anderson argued, B i l l i n g s , Montana For Respondent : Harold Hanser, County Attorney, argued, B i l l i n g s , Montana Thomas H. Mahan argued, Helena, Montana - Submitted: June 18, 1975 T-PP-- Decided:-.ED$ 7 Filed: - r r - IT--. M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. T h i s i s an a p p e a l from a judgment e n t e r e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Yellowstone County, which d e c l a f e d e i g h t c h i l d r e n depend e n t and n e g l e c t e d and awarded permanent custody and c o n t r o l t o t h e Child Welfare S e r v i c e s , Department of P u b l i c Welfare, S t a t e of Montana. Appellant mother, Judy P e t e r s o n , i s 30 y e a r s of age. F i v e of t h e c h i l d r e n were i s s u e of h e r f i r s t m a r r i a g e , one i s an i l l e g i t i m a t e c h i l d , and two a r e t h e i s s u e of h e r p r e s e n t marriage t o Dale P e t e r s o n , whom s h e married i n 1969 i n Wyoming. The f a m i l y came t o B i l l i n g s , Montana, i n 1971. I n November 1972, a s a r e s u l t of m a r i t a l problems i n t h e home, t h e c h i l d r e n were given t o t h e Yellowstone County Welfare Department by a p a r e n t a l agreement f o r a p e r i o d of t h i r t y days. On December 1 2 , 1972, a p e t i t i o n f o r temporary c u s t o d y was f i l e d by t h e w e l f a r e department and an o r d e r awarding temp o r a r y c u s t o d y of t h e e i g h t c h i l d r e n t o t h e Yellowstone County Welfare Department was g r a n t e d by t h e c o u r t . A petition for permanent custody w i t h r i g h t t o c o n s e n t t o a d o p t i o n of t h e c h i l d r e n was f i l e d on March 20, 1973. O August 1 6 , 1973, t h e p e t i t i o n n was heard by t h e c o u r t . O October 9 , 1973, D i s t r i c t Judge Robert H. Wilson n e n t e r e d f i n d i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s of law, o r d e r and judgment, which d e c l a r e d t h e e i g h t c h i l d r e n t o be dependent and n e g l e c t e d within t h e meaning of s e c t i o n 10-501, R.C.M. 1947, and awarded permanent c a r e , custody and c o n t r o l t o t h e Child Welfare S e r v i c e s D i v i s i o n of t h e Department of Welfare of t h e S t a t e of Montana, with t h e r i g h t t o consent t o t h e i r adoption. P e t e r s o n , a p p e a l s from t h a t judgment. The mother, Judy Appellant mother p r e s e n t e d s e v e r a l i s s u e s f o r review by t h i s Court of which t h e c o n t r o l l i n g i s s u e i s : Whether t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n f i n d i n g t h e c h i l d r e n dependent and n e g l e c t e d and awarding c u s t o d y t o t h e Child Welfare S e r v i c e s D i v i s i o n , w i t h a r i g h t t o consent t o a d o p t i o n . S e c t i o n 10-501, R.C.M. 1947, d e f i n e d a dependent and neglected c h i l d as: "* * * any c h i l d of t h e age of s i x t e e n y e a r s , o r who has no proper p a r e n t a l under t h a t age o r whose home, by care or guardianship r e a s o n of n e g l e c t , c r u e l t y , o r d e p r a v i t y on t h e p a r t of i t s p a r e n t s , g u a r d i a n , o r o t h e r person i n whose c a r e i t may b e , i s an u n f i t p l a c e f o r such c h i l d , o r whose environment i s such a s t o w a r r a n t t h e s t a t e , i n t h e i n t e r e s t of t h e c h i l d , t o assume i t s guardianship o r support. I I *** *** Testimony a t t h e permanent custody h e a r i n g on August 1 6 , 1973, e l i c i t e d t h e s e f a c t s : The husband i n t h e home, Dale P e t e r - son, was t h r e e times committed t o t h e Montana s t a t e h o s p i t a l f o r t h e i n s a n e by i n v o l u n t a r y proceedings. A t t h e time of t h e permanent custody h e a r i n g he was incompetent b u t was r e p r e s e n t e d a t t h e h e a r i n g by h i s s i s t e r , Joanne M a r t e l l , who had p r e v i o u s l y been appointed h i s guardian ad l i t e m . Peterson t o maltreat the children. I t was n o t uncommon f o r Dale The mother was given h e l p from v a r i o u s a g e n c i e s i n Wyoming and Montana i n t h e f i e l d s of food p r e p a r a t i o n , n u t r i t i o n , money management, c l o t h i n g , c l e a n l i n e s s and medical c a r e f o r t h e c h i l d r e n . Despite t h i s h e l p , t h e testimony r e v e a l e d over and over a g a i n t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n were n o t provided proper o r s u f f i c i e n t food, c l o t h i n g , s a n i t a r y medical c a r e even when t h e l a t t e r was s e r i o u s l y needed. I n t h e o p i n i o n of one s o c i a l worker who had made a p p r o x i - mately 45 v i s i t s t o t h e P e t e r s o n home, t h e c h i l d r e n ' s c l e a n l i n e s s was t h e worst he had e v e r seen. The c h i l d r e n o f t e n lacked warm c l o t h i n g i n t h e w i n t e r , even though v a r i o u s w e l f a r e a g e n c i e s had r e p e a t e d l y given t h e f a m i l y overshoes, heavy c o a t s , shoes and other clothing. The combination of t h e f a t h e r ' s behavior and t h e l a c k of t h e s e b a s i c needs r e s u l t e d i n a p s y c h o l o g i c a l - s o c i o l o g i c a l a s s e s s ment which concluded t h a t most of t h e c h i l d r e n had s e v e r e emot i o n a l problems. Four persons (a p u b l i c h e a l t h and s c h o o l n u r s e , a p s y c h i a t r i c n u r s e , and two s o c i a l w e l f a r e workers) u n q u a l i f i e d l y recommended t h e c h i l d r e n be permanently removed from b o t h parents. A f t e r t h e c h i l d r e n were removed from t h e p a r e n t s and placed i n a r e c e i v i n g home, c o n s i d e r a b l e emotional improvement was noted. The remaining i s s u e s p r e s e n t e d f o r review concern l a c k of due p r o c e s s a s a r e s u l t of unreasonable d e l a y from t h e d a t e of t h e temporary custody and t h e h e a r i n g on t h e permanent custody p e t i t i o n and whether i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d by v a r i o u s county agencies i s privileged. Was t h e e i g h t months d e l a y between t h e d a t e of t h e temporary custody o r d e r and t h e h e a r i n g on t h e permanent custody p e t i t i o n such an unreasonable l e n g t h of time a s t o c o n s t i t u t e a v i o l a t i o n of due p r o c e s s ? S e c t i o n 10-503, R.C.M. 1947, ( r e p e a l e d Ch. 328, Laws 1974), provided t h a t when c h i l d r e n a r e removed from t h e i r p a r e n t s i n an emergency s i t u a t i o n a p e t i t i o n f o r custody must be f i l e d w i t h i n 48 hours. I n t h i s i n s t a n c e , however, t h e c h i l d r e n were removed from t h e i r p a r e n t s under a t h i r t y day p a r e n t a l agreement a t t h e e x p i r a t i o n of which a temporary custody o r d e r was o b t a i n e d . There was an i n t e r v a l of e i g h t months between t h e d a t e of i s s u i n g t h e temporary o r d e r and t h e d a t e of h e a r i n g on t h e permanent custody p e t i t i o n . There i s no Montana s t a t u t e r e q u i r i n g a h e a r i n g w i t h i n a given time p e r i o d . Although t h e mother was r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l a t t h e h e a r i n g and two members of t h e Yellowstone County Welfare O f f i c e t e s t i f i e d , t h e r e c o r d c o n t a i n s no testimony r e g a r d i n g t h e r e a s o n f o r t h e d e l a y o r showing fundamental u n f a i r n e s s of such a d e l a y . During t h i s p e r i o d t h e mother had c o n t a c t w i t h t h e c h i l d r e n s e v e r a l times a week. There i s n o t h i n g i n t h e r e c o r d t o i n d i c a t e t h a t a demand f o r t h e c h i l d r e n o r an e a r l y h e a r i n g was e v e r made by t h e mother. I n support of h e r argument t h e mother c i t e s a Colorado c a s e , P.F.M. v. D i s t r i c t Court I n and For t h e County of Adams, Colo. 1974, 520 P.2d 742. There, a Colorado s t a t u t e demanded a h e a r i n g w i t h i n 48 hours a f t e r t h e t a k i n g o f t h e c h i l d r e n . The Colorado Supreme Court h e l d t h a t a h e a r i n g had t o o c c u r , b u t not t h a t f a i l u r e t o do s o w i t h i n 48 hours d i d - make t h e c u s t o d y proceedings void ab i n i t i o . This c a s e does n o t r e a c h t h e i s s u e involved h e r e . The q u e s t i o n of whether t h e i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d b y v a r i o u s county a g e n c i e s ( i . e . the school nurse, a public nurse, and s o c i a l w e l f a r e workers) d u r i n g t h e time they worked w i t h t h e P e t e r s o n f a m i l y , i n c l u d i n g p a r e n t s and c h i l d r e n , could be used a s evidence i n a dependent and n e g l e c t e d proceeding i s n o t supported by Montana s t a t u t e s on p r i v i l e g e communications o r c a s e law. Appellant mother c i t e s t h e Court t o T i t l e 42, U . S . C . A . 5602 ( a ) ( 9 ) , a f e d e r a l s t a t u t e r e q u i r i n g s t a t e a g e n c i e s t o p r o v i d e s a f e g u a r d s which r e s t r i c t t h e u s e o r d i s c l o s u r e of i n formation concerning a p p l i c a n t s and r e c i p i e n t s of w e l f a r e . T h i s f e d e r a l s t a t u t e c r e a t e s no p r i v i l e g e of communication between a w e l f a r e agency and a w e l f a r e c l i e n t i n a proceeding of t h i s nature. Child custody problems a r e never e a s i l y r e s o l v e d . How- e v e r , t h e c h i l d r e n ' s b e s t i n t e r e s t and w e l f a r e , n o t t h a t of t h e p a r e n t s , i s t h e paramount c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Mont . , I n r e Olson C h i l d r e n , 524 P.2d 779, 3 1 St.Rep.543; I n r e J u l i a Ann Bad Yellow H a i r , 162 Mont. 107, 112, 509 P.2d 9 , and c a s e s c i t e d therein. W a r e mindful t h a t o r d i n a r i l y a c h i l d ' s i n t e r e s t s and e w e l f a r e w i l l b e s t be served by r e t a i n i n g custody i n t h e n a t u r a l p a r e n t s , however, t h e circumstances of t h e i n d i v i d u a l c a s e may r e q u i r e a d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t . In r e J u l i a Ann Bad Yellow H a i r , supra. W f i n d no p r e j u d i c i a l e r r o r i n t h e r e c o r d . e Review o f t h e e n t i r e p r o c e e d i n g s ~ m l s t h a t t h e r e i s an abundance of s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence t o support t h e f i n d i n g and judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t . The judgment i s affirmed. ................................. Justice W Concur: e .............................. Chief J u s t i c e r Justices. \

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.