Background
Mesa County initiated a dependency-and-neglect case alleging that M.B. (father) and A.B. (mother) exposed their eight-year-old child to domestic violence and substance use. Both parents entered no-fault admissions, and the juvenile court adjudicated the child dependent and neglected.
After mother completed her treatment plan, the Department moved to transfer custody to her and terminate jurisdiction. The guardian ad litem then sought an allocation of parental responsibilities naming mother primary residential parent and sole decision-maker. Father objected, including to a provision allowing mother to decide what family time he would receive.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Court of Appeals held that the GAL had standing to seek an allocation of parental responsibilities after the dependency-and-neglect adjudication. The supreme court’s decision in People in Interest of R.M.P. concerned the State’s authority to initiate and prosecute a dependency-and-neglect petition through adjudication; it did not bar a GAL from advancing the child’s interests during the dispositional phase.
But the court held that the juvenile court improperly delegated the contested issue of father’s family time to mother by ordering that father would have reasonable family time as mother decided was in the child’s best interest. The court reversed that family-time provision and remanded for the juvenile court to determine family time. All other portions of the parental-responsibilities judgment remain in effect.
Key Takeaways
- A GAL may seek an allocation of parental responsibilities after a dependency-and-neglect adjudication.
- A court may not delegate contested parenting-time decisions to one parent.
- The juvenile court must determine parenting time based on the child’s best interests.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes between the State’s exclusive authority to initiate and prosecute a dependency-and-neglect petition to adjudication and a GAL’s role in representing the child’s interests during disposition.
It also reinforces that courts, not parents, must resolve contested parenting-time terms—particularly where the record reflects parental conflict and domestic-violence concerns.