No. 14763
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1979
IN THE MATTER OF C.M.S.,
A DEPENDENT AND NEGLECTED CHILD.
Appeal from: District Court of the Second Judicial District,
Honorable Arnold Olsen, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellant:
Leonard J. Haxby, Butte, Montana
For Respondent :
John G. Winston, County Attorney, Butte, Montana
Michael E. Wheat, Deputy County Attorney, Butte, Montana
Henningsen, Purcell and Genzberger, Butte, Montana
Corette, Smith, Dean, Pohlman and Allen, Butte, Montana
John R. Carr, Miles City, Montana
Submitted on briefs: September 20, 1979
Decided: N d v i : 1979
* .-
2
Filed: NOY
M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n 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 f i n d i n g C.M.S. a
d e p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d c h i l d and g i v i n g permanent c u s t o d y
w i t h t h e r i g h t t o c o n s e n t t o a d o p t i o n t o t h e Department o f
S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s of t h e S t a t e o f Montana.
C.M.S., a minor c h i l d , was b o r n i n B u t t e , S i l v e r Bow
County, Montana, on J u l y 9, 1975. H e r mother, a t b o t h t h e
t i m e of c o n c e p t i o n and d e l i v e r y , was c o n f i n e d t o t h e S t a t e
H o s p i t a l a t W a r m S p r i n g s , Montana, h a v i n g been a c q u i t t e d of
t h e c h a r g e o f homicide by r e a s o n o f a m e n t a l d e f e c t e x c l u d -
ing responsibility. The name of t h e f a t h e r i s unknown, and
t h i s i s r e f l e c t e d upon t h e c h i l d ' s b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e .
Following t h e b i r t h o f t h e c h i l d , t h e mother was re-
t u r n e d t o t h e S t a t e H o s p i t a l a t W a r m S p r i n g s where s h e h a s
been and i s s t i l l c o n f i n e d . The c h i l d w a s p l a c e d under t h e
p r o t e c t i v e g u i d a n c e of t h e B u t t e - S i l v e r Bow O f f i c e o f t h e
Department o f S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s . Immedi-
a t e l y f o l l o w i n g h e r b i r t h , on J u l y 11, 1975, t h e Department
p l a c e d t h e c h i l d i n a f o s t e r home, l i c e n s e d by t h e S t a t e of
Montana, t o i n s u r e t h a t t h e c h i l d s h o u l d r e c e i v e p r o p e r
care. The c h i l d h a s remained i n t h i s same home f o r o v e r 3-
1 / 2 y e a r s a t t h e t i m e of h e a r i n g , and a t t h i s p o i n t , o v e r 4
years. The home p r o v i d e d f o r t h e c h i l d h a s f o u r o t h e r
c h i l d r e n and i s t h e o n l y f a m i l y u n i t t h e c h i l d h a s e v e r had.
During t h e 3-1/2 y e a r s p r i o r t o t h e h e a r i n g , t h e Depart-
ment o f S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s (SRS) s o u g h t on
t h r e e o c c a s i o n s t o a c q u i r e permanent c u s t o d y w i t h t h e r i g h t
t o consent t o adoption. On e a c h o c c a s i o n , SRS's p e t i t i o n
w a s o b j e c t e d t o by t h e g u a r d i a n o f t h e b i o l o g i c a l mother
upon t h e grounds t h a t s h e was m e n t a l l y i n c o m p e t e n t , was
c o n f i n e d a t t h e Warm S p r i n g s S t a t e H o s p i t a l , a d i s a b i l i t y
which p r e v e n t e d h e r from c a r i n g f o r t h e c h i l d .
The Honorable A. B. M a r t i n of M i l e s C i t y , Montana, made
a n o r d e r f o l l o w i n g a c q u i t t a l of t h e mother on homicide
c h a r g e s by r e a s o n o f m e n t a l d e f e c t e x c l u d i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ,
t h a t James B. Hathaway be a p p o i n t e d a s g u a r d i a n of t h e
p e r s o n and t h e e s t a t e of t h e mother, and c o u n s e l w a s ap-
proved by t h a t c o u r t f o r t h e g u a r d i a n s h i p .
On November 23, 1976, SRS f i l e d t h i s p e t i t i o n i n t h e
D i s t r i c t C o u r t o f S i l v e r Bow County f o r permanent c u s t o d y o f
t h e c h i l d with t h e r i g h t t o consent t o her adoption. After
n o t i c e was g i v e n t o a l l concerned p a r t i e s , a series of
h e a r i n g s were h e l d t o d e t e r m i n e whether SRS s h o u l d be awarded
t h e permanent c u s t o d y w i t h t h e r i g h t t o c o n s e n t t o a d o p t i o n .
A t these hearings, Leonard J . Haxby a p p e a r e d on b e h a l f of
t h e mother. John R. C a r r w a s r e t a i n e d by t h e m o t h e r ' s
g u a r d i a n , James Hathaway of M i l e s C i t y , t o r e p r e s e n t t h e
i n t e r e s t s of t h e guardian i n t h e proceedings. James E.
P u r c e l l w a s a p p o i n t e d by t h e c o u r t a s a t t o r n e y f o r t h e minor
child. Michael E. Wheat, a s s i s t a n t d e p u t y c o u n t y a t t o r n e y ,
a p p e a r e d f o r SRS, and Dolphy 0 . Pohlman r e p r e s e n t e d t h e
f o s t e r parents.
A t a h e a r i n g on December 2 1 , 1978, a f t e r a l l p a r t i e s
had been p r o p e r l y s e r v e d and were p r e s e n t i n c o u r t and
r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l , a motion w a s made by a p p e l l a n t ' s
counsel t h a t t h e c o u r t lacked proper j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e
matter. The h e a r i n g w a s c o n t i n u e d s o t h a t a d d i t i o n a l t i m e
could be taken t o determine t h e r e s t o r a t i o n capacity of
a p p e l l a n t , who a t t h a t t i m e w a s making a n e f f o r t t o be
r e l e a s e d from t h e S t a t e H o s p i t a l and r e s t o r e d t o c a p a c i t y .
The c o u r t o r d e r e d t h a t t h e h e a r i n g resume on F e b r u a r y 1 5 ,
1979. On t h a t d a t e t h e h e a r i n g was resumed, and a p p e l l a n t
again objected t o t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e court. The c o u r t
o v e r r u l e d t h e o b j e c t i o n and proceeded t o a f i n a l h e a r i n g .
From t h e e v i d e n c e adduced a t t h e h e a r i n g , t h e c o u r t found
t h a t C.M.S. was abused, d e p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d and g r a n t e d
t h e p e t i t i o n of SRS f o r permanent c u s t o d y of t h e c h i l d w i t h
t h e r i g h t of a d o p t i o n i n t h e S t a t e .
Two i s s u e s a r e r a i s e d by a p p e l l a n t :
(1) Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t l a c k e d j u r i s d i c t i o n t o
hear t h e m a t t e r because a p p e l l a n t d i d n o t consent t o t h e
proceedings?
(2) Whether t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e c o u r t t h a t C.M.S. was
a b u s e d , d e p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d w e r e s u p p o r t e d by s u f f i c i e n t
c r e d i b l e evidence?
Regarding t h e f i r s t i s s u e , a p p e l l a n t m a i n t a i n s t h a t
c o n s e n t was a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l p r e r e q u i s i t e t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g s
i n t h e i n s t a n t case. A p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t SRS's p e t i t i o n
was, i n e f f e c t , a p e t i t i o n f o r a d o p t i o n and under s e c t i o n
40-8-111, MCA, consent i s required f o r adoptions. Before
t h e c o u r t c o u l d g r a n t SRS c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d w i t h t h e
r i g h t t o consent t o her adoption, a p p e l l a n t contends t h a t
SRS had t o o b t a i n e i t h e r h e r c o n s e n t o r t h a t of h e r l e g a l
guardian. Without s u c h c o n s e n t , t h e c o u r t l a c k e d t h e neces-
s a r y j u r i s d i c t i o n t o proceed.
I n answering t h i s argument, w e n o t e f i r s t t h a t a p p e l -
l a n t i s correct i n asserting that, a s a general rule,
p a r e n t a l consent i s required f o r adoptions. S e c t i o n 40-8-
111, MCA. I n t h i s c a s e , however, t h e c o n s e n t of a p p e l l a n t
o r her l e g a l guardian w a s n o t necessary f o r t h e c o u r t t o
obtain jurisdiction. The p e t i t i o n f i l e d by SRS was n o t f o r
a n a d o p t i o n b u t was f o r a d e c l a r a t i o n of dependency and
neglect. C h a p t e r 3 , T i t l e 4 1 of t h e Montana Code Annotated
p r o v i d e s t h a t c h i l d r e n may be d e c l a r e d d e p e n d e n t and ne-
g l e c t e d under c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s and t h a t a p e t i t i o n e r
may a s k f o r permanent l e g a l c u s t o d y w i t h t h e r i g h t t o con-
s e n t t o adoption as r e l i e f . Parental consent i s neither
necessary t o d e c l a r e a c h i l d abused, dependent o r neglected
n o r t o g r a n t permanent c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d t o p e r s o n s o t h e r
than t h e natural parents. A l l t h a t i s required, rather, is
t h a t t h e c o u r t f i n d , upon t h e b a s i s o f s u f f i c i e n t c r e d i b l e
e v i d e n c e , t h a t t h e c h i l d i s , w i t h i n t h e t e r m s of t h e s t a t u -
t o r y d e f i n i t i o n s , "abused, dependent, o r neglected."
A p p e l l a n t ' s a p p a r e n t c o n f u s i o n l i e s w i t h t h e number o f
s t a t u t o r y schemes a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e t e r m i n a t i o n of p a r e n t a l
r i g h t s and t h e f a c t t h a t , t o some e x t e n t , t h e s e s t a t u t o r y
schemes may be s a i d t o o v e r l a p . While c o n s e n t i s r e q u i r e d
under some schemes, i t i s n o t r e q u i r e d under o t h e r s . Pre-
v i o u s l y , w e have a t t e m p t e d t o c l a r i f y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s
between t h e s t a t u t o r y schemes where o t h e r s have been con-
fused. W e s t a t e d i n M a t t e r o f G u a r d i a n s h i p of Aschenbrenner
(1979) Mont. , 597 P.2d 1156, 1164, 36 St.Rep.
"The c o n f u s i o n o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s under-
standable. W e a r e able t o i d e n t i f y a t l e a s t
f i v e s t a t u t o r y schemes g o v e r n i n g t h e t e r m i n a -
t i o n of p a r e n t a l r i g h t s o r t h e custody of
c h i l d r e n o r both. [Citations omitted. 1
" N e v e r t h e l e s s , w h i l e t h e r e i s some o v e r l a p i n
t h e s e various procedures a s t o g e n e r a l s u b j e c t
m a t t e r , e a c h i s used f o r a d i s t i n c t p u r p o s e
and s e t s f o r t h s p e c i f i c p r o c e d u r e s which must
be f o l l o w e d b e f o r e a v a l i d judgment o r o r d e r
may b e i s s u e d . "
Here, S R S proceeded under t h e p r o v i s i o n s f o r d e c l a r i n g
a c h i l d dependent o r neglected. Parental consent i s n o t
r e q u i r e d under t h i s c h a p t e r f o r a t l e a s t two r e a s o n s .
F i r s t , r e q u i r i n g consent could conceivably d e f e a t t h e policy
and t h e p u r p o s e s of p r o t e c t i n g a b u s e d , d e p e n d e n t , and
neglected children:
" ( 1 ) I t i s hereby d e c l a r e d t o b e t h e p o l i c y of
t h e s t a t e o f Montana t o :
" ( a ) i n s u r e t h a t a l l youth a r e a f f o r d e d an
a d e q u a t e p h y s i c a l and e m o t i o n a l environment t o
promote normal development;
" (2) I t is t h e p o l i c y of t h i s s t a t e t o provide
f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h
and w e l f a r e a r e a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d and f u r t h e r
t h r e a t e n e d by t h e c o n d u c t o f t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e
f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . . ." Section
41-3-101, MCA.
Second, i t i s , s t r i c t l y s p e a k i n g , i l l o g i c a l t o r e q u i r e
p a r e n t a l c o n s e n t i n dependency and n e g l e c t p r o c e e d i n g s .
Such p r o c e e d i n g s by t h e i r v e r y n a t u r e a r e h o s t i l e t o t h e
p a r e n t s and a g a i n s t t h e i r w i s h e s .
Even t h e a d o p t i o n s t a t u t e s o f t h i s s t a t e e x c e p t t h e
g e n e r a l r e q u i r e m e n t o f p a r e n t a l c o n s e n t where c h i l d r e n are
a b u s e d , d e p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d . S e c t i o n 40-8-111, MCA,
provides i n p e r t i n e n t part:
" ( 1 ) An a d o p t i o n of a c h i l d may be d e c r e e d when
t h e r e have been f i l e d w r i t t e n c o n s e n t s t o adop-
t i o n e x e c u t e d by:
" (a) both parents, i f l i v i n g , o r t h e surviving
p a r e n t of a c h i l d , p r o v i d e d t h a t c o n s e n t s h a l l
-t-e r e q u i r e d - - a f a t h e r - mother:
no b from or
" (iii)who h a s been j u d i c i a l l y d e p r i v e d of t h e
c u s t o d y of t h e c h i l d o n a c c o u n t of c r u e l t y o r
n e g l e c t toward t h e c h i l d ;
" ( i v ) who h a s . . . willfully abandoned such
child;
" ( v ) who h a s c a u s e d t h e c h i l d t o be m a i n t a i n e d
by ... t h e d e p a r t m e n t of s o c i a l and r e h a b i l i -
t a t i o n s e r v i c e s o f t h e s t a t e o f Montana f o r a
p e r i o d of 1 y e a r w i t h o u t c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e
s u p p o r t of s a i d c h i l d d u r i n g s a i d p e r i o d , i f
able; o r
" ( v i ) i f i t i s proven t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n of
t h e c o u r t t h a t s a i d f a t h e r o r mother, i f a b l e ,
h a s n o t c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e s u p p o r t of s a i d c h i l d
d u r i n g a p e r i o d of 1 y e a r b e f o r e t h e f i l i n g of
a p e t i t i o n f o r adoption." (Emphasis added.)
Here, t h e r i g h t s of t h e n a t u r a l p a r e n t s t o due p r o c e s s
of law w e r e p r o p e r l y r e c o g n i z e d . The s p e c i f i c p r o c e d u r e s i n
s e c t i o n 41-3-401, MCA, w e r e complied w i t h . Proper n o t i c e
was g i v e n t o a p p e l l a n t and h e r g u a r d i a n . The f a t h e r o f t h e
c h i l d w a s n o t known, i s n o t now known, and h a s been n e v e r
named on t h e c h i l d ' s b i r t h c e r t i f i c a t e . A p p e l l a n t , who was
p r e s e n t a t t h e h e a r i n g o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t , a l s o had a
chance t o r e f u t e t h e a l l e g a t i o n s , b u t s h e c h o s e n o t t o t a k e
advantage of t h e opportunity. The o n l y t e s t i m o n y p r e s e n t e d
on h e r b e h a l f w a s by h e r home economics t e a c h e r a t t h e S t a t e
Hospital regarding h e r a b i l i t y i n t h e classroom.
W e f i n d t h a t t h e c o n s e n t of a p p e l l a n t or t h a t o f h e r
l e g a l g u a r d i a n was n o t n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e c o u r t t o o b t a i n
j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e i n s t a n t case.
Turning t o t h e second i s s u e , a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t 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 a t C.M.S.
w a s a b u s e d , d e p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d b e c a u s e t h e f i n d i n g s
w e r e n o t s u p p o r t e d by s u f f i c i e n t c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e .
I n a d d r e s s i n g t h e d u t y of a D i s t r i c t C o u r t t o make
f i n d i n g s i n an abuse o r n e g l e c t a c t i o n , t h i s Court has
recognized t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court's f i n d i n g s w i l l enjoy a
p r e s u m p t i o n o f c o r r e c t n e s s and w i l l n o t be o v e r t u r n e d u n l e s s
u n s u p p o r t e d by c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e that would amount t o a
c l e a r abuse of d i s c r e t i o n . I n t h e d e c i s i o n of I n re G . ,
Youths i n Need o f C a r e ( 1 9 7 7 ) , Mont. , 570 P.2d
1110, 1112, 3 4 St.Rep. 1179, 1181-82, w e s t a t e d :
" T h i s C o u r t i s m i n d f u l t h a t t h e p r i m a r y d u t y of
deciding t h e proper custody of t h e c h i l d i s t h e
t a s k of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t . A s a r e s u l t , a l l
reasonable presumptions a s t o t h e c o r r e c t n e s s
o f t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t w i l l
b e made. [ C i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d . I Due t o t h i s
presumption o f c o r r e c t n e s s , t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t
f i n d i n g s w i l l n o t b e d i s t u r b e d on a p p e a l u n l e s s
t h e r e i s a m i s t a k e o f law o r f i n d i n g o f f a c t
n o t s u p p o r t e d by c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e t h a t would
amount t o a clear a b u s e of d i s c r e t i o n . "
A t i s s u e h e r e i s whether t h e r e was s u f f i c i e n t c r e d i b l e
e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e f i n d i n g t h a t C.M.S. was " a b u s e d , de-
p e n d e n t and n e g l e c t e d . " Those t e r m s a r e d e f i n e d under s e c -
t i o n 41-3-102, MCA:
" ( 2 ) 'Abuse' o r ' n e g l e c t ' means:
" ( b ) t h e commission o r o m i s s i o n of any a c t o r
a c t s by any p e r s o n i n t h e s t a t u s o f p a r e n t ,
g u a r d i a n , o r c u s t o d i a n who t h e r e b y and by r e a -
s o n of p h y s i c a l o r m e n t a l i n c a p a c i t y o r o t h e r
c a u s e r e f u s e s , o r , w i t h s t a t e and p r i v a t e a i d
and a s s i s t a n c e , i s u n a b l e t o d i s c h a r g e t h e
d u t i e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r p r o p e r and
necessary subsistence, education, medical, o r
any o t h e r care n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e y o u t h ' s phy-
s i c a l , moral and e m o t i o n a l w e l l b e i n g .
" ( 3 ) 'Dependent y o u t h ' means a y o u t h who i s
abandoned, d e p e n d e n t upon t h e p u b l i c f o r sup-
p o r t , d e s t i t u t e , without parents o r guardian o r
under t h e c a r e and s u p e r v i s i o n of a s u i t a b l e
a d u l t , o r who h a s no p r o p e r g u i d a n c e t o p r o v i d e
f o r h i s n e c e s s a r y p h y s i c a l , m o r a l , and e m o t i o n a l
w e l l being . . ."
W e f i n d t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t abuse i t s
d i s c r e t i o n i n f i n d i n g t h a t C.M.S. w a s " a b u s e d , d e p e n d e n t and
n e g l e c t e d " and t h a t t h e r e was s u f f i c i e n t c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e
t o support t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e c o u r t . With r e s p e c t t o t h e
f i n d i n g o f " a b u s e o r n e g l e c t , " w e t a k e j u d i c i a l n o t i c e of
t h e order f i l e d i n t h i s case t h a t a p p e l l a n t w a s confined t o
t h e S t a t e H o s p i t a l i n 1973; t h a t s h e h a s s u f f e r e d from a n
organic b r a i n dysfunction s i n c e b i r t h ; t h a t she experiences
d e l u s i o n s ; and, t h a t h e r c o n d i t i o n i s d i a g n o s e d a s p a r a n o i d
s c h i z o p h r e n i a w i t h no hope o f s i g n i f i c a n t improvement in t h e
foreseeable future.
The r e c o r d a l s o d i s c l o s e s t h a t a p p e l l a n t w a s p r e s e n t a t
t h e h e a r i n g s h e l d by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t r e g a r d i n g SRS's
p e t i t i o n , b u t made no a t t e m p t t o p e r s o n a l l y t e s t i f y a s t o
h e r p a r e n t a l f i t n e s s . The o n l y t e s t i m o n y p r e s e n t e d on b e h a l f
o f a p p e l l a n t r e g a r d i n g h e r p a r e n t a l f i t n e s s w a s t h a t of a
home economics t e a c h e r from t h e S t a t e H o s p i t a l who t e s t i f i e d
t h a t a p p e l l a n t had s u c c e s s f u l l y completed a home economics
c o u r s e , o n e a s p e c t o f which w a s c h i l d development. We
b e l i e v e t h a t , under t h e s t a t u t e , a p p e l l a n t ' s c o n f i n e m e n t i s
a s u f f i c i e n t a c t o f o m i s s i o n which, by r e a s o n of p h y s i c a l
and m e n t a l i n c a p a c i t y , r e n d e r s a p p e l l a n t u n a b l e t o d i s c h a r g e
t h e d u t i e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e c h i l d ' s
well-being.
With r e s p e c t t o t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s f i n d i n g t h a t
C.M.S. w a s a dependent youth, t h e record d i s c l o s e s t h a t
a p p e l l a n t i s p o s s e s s e d o f a $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 e s t a t e and t h a t s h e h a s
c o n t r i b u t e d i n no s u b s t a n t i a l way t o t h e s u p p o r t of C.M.S.
R a t h e r , t h e s u p p o r t which h a s been g i v e n h a s been p r o v i d e d
by SRS and t h e f o s t e r p a r e n t s . Finally, the record indi-
c a t e s t h a t a p p e l l a n t , b e c a u s e of h e r m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n , c o u l d
n o t p r o v i d e p r o p e r g u i d a n c e f o r C.M.S.'s necessary physical,
moral and e m o t i o n a l w e l l - b e i n g .
A p p e l l a n t i s demanding e v e r y f a c e t o f s t a t u t o r y scheme
b e s e v e r e l y and s t r i c t l y s c r u t i n i z e d t o p r o t e c t t h e r i g h t s
of t h e n a t u r a l p a r e n t . However, p r o c e e d i n g s conducted under
t h e " a b u s e s t a t u t e " demand and p r o v i d e a c e r t a i n amount o f
e l a s t i c i t y t o the court. Every c a s e i s u n i q u e and must b e
d e a l t w i t h on i t s own m e r i t s . Absent a c l e a r a b u s e of
d i s c r e t i o n t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e D i s t r i c t Court i s t o be
upheld. There i s no s u c h a b u s e of d i s c r e t i o n h e r e .
The D i s t r i c t C o u r t i n a l l s u c h h e a r i n g s h a s a n o b l i g a -
t i o n t o b a l a n c e t h e r i g h t s of t h e mother and t h e c h i l d . And
w h i l e t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r i g h t s are of g r e a t i m p o r t , i t i s n o t
an a b s o l u t e r i g h t . I n a r e c e n t m a t t e r from t h e D i s t r i c t o f
Columbia, M a t t e r o f t h e Adoption o f J.S.R. (D.C. 1 9 7 7 ) , 374
A.2d 860, 863, t h e c o u r t h e l d :
"The r i g h t o f a n a t u r a l p a r e n t t o r a i s e o n e ' s
c h i l d i s a fundamental and e s s e n t i a l o n e which
i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y protected. [Citations
o m i t t e d . ] However, i t i s n o t a n a b s o l u t e one.
The s t a t e h a s b o t h t h e r i g h t and t h e d u t y t o
p r o t e c t minor c h i l d r e n t h r o u g h j u d i c i a l d e t e r -
minations of t h e i r i n t e r e s t . To t h i s end t h e
s t a t e h a s a s u b s t a n t i a l r a n g e of a u t h o r i t y t o
p r o t e c t t h e w e l f a r e of t h e c h i l d . [Citations
omitted. 1"
See a l s o Matter o f G u a r d i a n s h i p o f Doney ( 1 9 7 7 ) , Mon t .
, 570 P.2d 575, 577, 34 St.Rep. 1107, 1 1 1 0 ; M a t t e r o f
G u a r d i a n s h i p of Aschenbrenner ( 1 9 7 9 ) , Mon t . , 597
P.2d 1156, 1160, 36 St.Rep. 1282, 1284; Boyer v . Boyer (Ohio
This Court r e c e n t l y faced a s i m i l a r contention. I n t h e
Matter of Inquiry i n t o J.J.S., Youth i n Need o f C a r e ( 1 9 7 8 ) ,
Mont. , 577 P.2d 378, 381, 35 St.Rep. 394, 397, t h e
Court held:
"We f i n d no a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n by t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t i n awarding permanent c u s t o d y t o SRS. I n
determining t h e custody i s s u e , t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s
o f t h e c h i l d i s t h e paramount c o n c e r n . In the
M a t t e r o f Henderson ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 168 Mont. 329, 342
P.2d 1204, t h i s C o u r t s a i d :
"'What i s , o r what i s n o t i n t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t
o f t h e c h i l d depends upon t h e f a c t s and circum-
s t a n c e s of each case. The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of de-
c i d i n g c u s t o d y i s a d e l i c a t e one which i s lodged
with the d i s t r i c t court. The judge h e a r i n g o r a l
testimony i n such a controversy has a superior
a d v a n t a g e i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s a m e , and h i s d e c i -
s i o n o u g h t n o t t o b e d i s t u r b e d e x c e p t upon a
c l e a r showing o f a b u s e of d i s c r e t i o n . ' [ C i t a t i o n s
omitted . I "
While i t i s t h e f u n c t i o n of t h i s C o u r t whenever pos-
s i b l e t o p r o t e c t t h e u n i t y o f t h e f a m i l y under s e c t i o n 41-3-
101, MCA, t h i s i s n o t a f a c t o r i n t h i s c a u s e . Here t h e
c h i l d h a s n e v e r had a v i a b l e p a r e n t - c h i l d r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
t h e mother. I n f a c t , t h e c h i l d h a s n e v e r s e e n o r been
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h e r n a t u r a l mother. She knows b u t o n e
family--her f o s t e r home. I t i s the only family r e l a t i o n s h i p
t h e c h i l d has. I n d e e d , h e r f o s t e r p a r e n t s have w i l l i n g l y
u n d e r t a k e n t h e o b l i g a t i o n s o f r a i s i n g t h i s c h i l d , and what
appellant neglects t o realize is t h a t the obligations t h a t
a r e a t t e n d a n t w i t h p a r e n t h o o d have n e v e r i n any way been
assumed by a p p e l l a n t , t h e n a t u r a l mother.
This Court i n a r e c e n t decision, I n re G., s u p r a , 570
P.2d a t 1 1 1 4 , 3 4 St.Rep. a t 1179, s e t f o r t h t h e c r i t e r i a
which w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n dependent and n e g l e c t c a s e s .
There we n o t e d :
" C h i l d r e n have a r i g h t under t h e ' b e s t i n t e r e s t
t e s t ' t o r e c e i v e normal p h y s i c a l and e m o t i o n a l
development. By l o o k i n g a t t h e t o t a l i t y of t h e
c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e c o u r t may d e t e r m i n e what i s
the child's 'best interest.'"
Viewing a l l t h e t e s t i m o n y p r e s e n t e d , o n e r e l e v a n t f a c t
emerges: The c h i l d i s a n e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f a f a m i l y . She
h a s developed a n e m o t i o n a l and p h y s i c a l t r u s t f o r h e r f o s t e r
parents. The r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t s h e h a s w i t h h e r " b r o t h e r s
and s i s t e r s " c a n o n l y be developed i n a l o v i n g environment.
T h i s c h i l d i s undergoing a normal and p h y s i c a l development
w i t h i n a p r o p e r f a m i l y home s i t u a t i o n , and i t i s i n h e r b e s t
i n t e r e s t t h a t s h e r e m a i n s i n same.
The c o u r t r e c o g n i z e d t h a t t h e r e w e r e competing r i g h t s
between t h e c h i l d and t h e mother h e r e . The c o u r t a p p o i n t e d
counsel t o represent t h e c h i l d ' s i n t e r e s t s . After reviewing
a l l o f t h e f a c t s and e v i d e n c e , t h e r e c a n b e b u t o n e con-
clusion--the b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f C.M.S. c a n o n l y be s e r v e d by
a f f i r m i n g t h e judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t .
The judgment of the District Court is in accord with
its findings of fact and conclusions of law and is affirmed.
We concur: