Revisor's Note:

Section was amended twice in the 2000 session, see also 38-1583a.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"The Effect of Domestic Violence on Parental Rights in Kansas after In re Adoption of A.P.," Amy E. Wilbur, 39 W.L.J. 288 (2000).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Reasonable efforts to avoid placing child in need of care outside home. 89-31.

Reporting of certain abuse or neglect of a child; pregnancy. 92-48.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Father's parental rights terminated. In re K.G.O., 12 Kan. App. 2d 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 738 P.2d 98 (1987).

2. District court's decision to terminate parental rights affirmed. In re J.G., 12 Kan. App. 2d 44, 45, 51, 52, 734 P.2d 1195 (1987).

3. Pendency of proceeding does not preclude relinquishment of parental rights under K.S.A. 38-125 et seq. In re A.W., 241 Kan. 810, 814, 816, 740 P.2d 82 (1987).

4. Cited; requirement for trial de novo on appeal to district court (K.S.A. 38-1591) from ruling hereunder examined. In re K.J., 242 Kan. 418, 748 P.2d 419 (1988).

5. Cited; second severance proceeding, change of circumstances, inapplicability of res judicata and collateral estoppel examined. In re A.S., 12 Kan. App. 2d 594, 597, 752 P.2d 705 (1988).

6. Due process rights of incarcerated father not violated because of inability to personally attend severance hearing. In re J.L.D., 14 Kan. App. 2d 487, 794 P.2d 319 (1990).

7. Appellate scope of review in termination of parental rights stated. In re S.M.Q., 247 Kan. 231, 796 P.2d 543 (1990).

8. Parent's incarceration not a mitigating factor in the failure to comply with family reintegration plan. In re M.D.S., 16 Kan. App. 2d 505, 507, 510, 825 P.2d 1155 (1992).

9. Conduct of parent examined in regard to child in need of care determination and severance of parental rights. In re D.V., 17 Kan. App. 2d 788, 790, 792, 793, 844 P.2d 752 (1993).

10. Cited in holding appeal from denial of motion to terminate parental rights appealable as an order of disposition. In re T.D.W., 18 Kan. App. 2d 286, 290, 850 P.2d 947 (1993).

11. Whether court improperly evaluated factors in severing parental rights examined; incidental contacts construed. In re M.M., 19 Kan. App. 2d 600, 601, 607, 873 P.2d 1371 (1994).

12. Whether facts regarding conduct of parents warrants a finding children were in need of care examined. In re N.D.G., 20 Kan. App. 2d 17, 23, 883 P.2d 89 (1994).

13. Whether subsection (a)(1) violates due process by shifting burden of proof to parents examined; standard of proof discussed. In re L.D.B., 20 Kan. App. 2d 643, 646, 891 P.2d 468 (1995).

14. Level of unfitness necessary in successful child in need of care proceeding does not rise to level necessary to terminate parental rights. In re R.C., 21 Kan. App. 2d 702, 709, 907 P.2d 901 (1995).

15. Substantial evidence supports trial court's ruling that natural father was unfit parent. In re Adoption of Baby Boy S., 22 Kan. App. 2d 119, 134, 912 P.2d 761 (1996).

16. Previous finding of unfitness shifts burden to parent to show fitness by preponderance of the evidence. In re L.D.B., 22 Kan. App. 2d 821, 824, 924 P.2d 642 (1996).

17. Substantial competent evidence supporting termination of parental rights determination; alleged father failed to contradict court's findings regarding parental conduct. In re A.N.P., 23 Kan. App. 2d 686, 692, 934 P.2d 995 (1997).

18. Agreement by parents that noncustodial parent's rights should be terminated for lack of contact with child upheld. In re C.D.W., 24 Kan. App. 2d 456, 460, 946 P.2d 100 (1997).

19. Procedure, burden of proof and standard of review examined in Indian parent's parental rights termination case. In re A.P., 25 Kan. App. 2d 268, 277, 278, 961 P.2d 706 (1998); In re H.A.M., 25 Kan. App. 2d 289, 295, 296, 297, 961 P.2d 716 (1998).

20. District court standard of review for appeal of termination of parental rights by magistrate on the record is substantial competent evidence. In re J.H., 25 Kan. App. 2d 372, 376, 962 P.2d 1127 (1998).

21. Trial court application of statutory presumption of unfitness without issuing a written pretrial order upheld. In re D.R.R., 25 Kan. App. 2d 561, 566, 965 P.2d 861 (1998).

22. Parental rights of father severed as he had not supported child and continues in jail. In re D.T., 30 Kan. App. 2d 1172, 56 P.3d 840 (2002).

23. Substantial competent evidence lacking to show prior conviction and imprisonment made father unfit parent. In re E.T., 36 Kan. App. 2d 56, 58, 78, 137 P.3d 1035 (2006).

24. Cited; consensual appointment of permanent guardian under K.S.A. 38-1587 does not terminate parent's obligation to support child. State ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Bohrer, 286 Kan. 898, 902, 904, 905, 913, 917, 922, 189 P.3d 1157 (2008).

25. Termination of parental rights of imprisoned father upheld; Indian child welfare act construed and applied. In re M.B., 39 Kan. App. 2d 31, 44 to 47, 176 P.3d 977 (2008).