Stacy Byrd, an outstanding student of our clinic, has this Note in the current issue of the University of Miami Law Review: Learning from the Past: Why Termination of a Non-citizen Parent’s Rights Should Not Be Based on the Child’s Best Interests.
That’s what the Eleventh Circuit is trying to figure out, and it’s asked for some clarification from the Florida Supreme Court in J.R. v. Hansen, 12-14212, 2013 WL 6223684 (11th Cir. 2013):
1) Does “support plan” review under Fla. Stat. § 393.0651 require the Agency for Persons with Disabilities to consider the propriety of a continued involuntary admission to residential services order entered under Fla. Stat. § 393.11?
2) Is the Agency for Persons with Disabilities required, pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 393.0651 and/or Fla. Stat. § 393.11, to petition the circuit court for the release from an involuntary admission order in cases where the APD determines that the circumstances that led to the initial admission order have changed?
3) Does Fla. Stat. § 393.062 et. seq. provide a statutory mandate to meaningfully periodically review involuntary admissions to non-secure residential services consistent with the commitment schemes discussed in Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 99 S.Ct. 2493, 61 L.Ed.2d 101 (1979) and Williams v. Wallis, 734 F.2d 1434 (11th Cir.1984)?