Sherrie Rye v. Lucas County Department of Job and Family Services

In an attempt to expedite the process of finding permanent homes for children suffering abuse or neglect, Congress passed the American Safe Families Act (ASFA) in 1997, which incentivized states to implement statutes to shorten the amount of time kids spend in foster care. The Act shortened the amount of time kids could spend in temporary custodial situations and encouraged skipping reasonable efforts to reunite families in certain circumstances. It set up exceptions to making reasonable efforts to keep the child(ren) with the parent(s) including “presumptions” that a parent for a past termination is unfit as well as shifting the burden of proof to the parent to prove fitness. Every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands enacted laws that allowed them to bypass or limit the provision of reasonable efforts where parents had prior termination of parental rights (TPR). Over 30 states have passed such laws including Ohio. Most states use a “clear and convincing” standard of proof while others use a “beyond reasonable doubt” standard. In addition to the standard of review, many of these states, including Ohio, utilize a subjective “best interests of the child” catch-all to override any parental rights. The Question Presented is: 1. In light of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) enacted by Congress in 1997, should this Court expand the minimum burden of proof to terminate parental rights as established in Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982) to a standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt as well as prohibit burden-shifting to a parent in such proceedings?