Legal Opinion

R.J.M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1999No. S-8525PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

The superior court found R.J.M. and P.M. unwilling to care for their son J.M. and under the child in need of aid (CINA) statute, terminated their parental rights. Because P.M.’s failure to seek treatment for her mental illness constitutes unwillingness to provide care, we affirm the termination of her parental rights. Because the superior court did not clearly err in finding that R.J.M. was unwilling to care for J.M., we affirm the termination of R.J.M.’s parental rights. We also affirm the trial court’s refusal to consider changed circumstances, and…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Rose v. LockeSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. A.M. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
  3. N.A. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Summers v. AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Lashbrook v. LashbrookAlaska Supreme Court · 1998

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Brynna B. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  2. A.B. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
  3. C.W. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  4. J.H. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Enders v. ParkerAlaska Supreme Court · 2005

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API