The Maine Supreme Judicial Court dismissed an appeal by former resource parents who sought to intervene in a child protection case after the Department of Health and Human Services removed two children from their care. The court held that the district court's orders denying the parents' motions to intervene and request expedited judicial review were not appealable.
The case, *In re Children of Krystal W.*, involved two children who entered Department custody after child protection proceedings began against their biological parents in 2020 and 2021. The Department eventually filed petitions to terminate the parents' parental rights, and following a final hearing in March 2023, the court terminated those rights. The biological parents did not appeal the termination.
In February 2023, one month before the final hearing on the termination petitions, the Department placed the children with a husband and wife as resource parents under the Child and Family Services and Child Protection Act. The children remained in their care for 19 months until September 12, 2024, when the Department removed them after receiving a report from the older child's school about an incident involving the husband.
Following the removal, the former resource parents filed motions on October 31, 2024, seeking to intervene in the child protection proceeding pursuant to 22 M.R.S. § 4005-D(1)(D) and Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 24. They also requested an expedited judicial review of the children's placement. The District Court for Springvale and Biddeford, presided over by Judge Duddy, denied both motions.
The former resource parents then appealed the district court's orders to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. However, the state's highest court concluded that the orders were not appealable and dismissed the appeal. Justice Douglas authored the majority opinion, joined by Justices Mead, Connors, Lawrence, and Lipez. Chief Justice Stanfill dissented from the majority's decision.
The case highlights the limited rights of resource parents, also known as foster parents, in Maine's child protection system. While resource parents provide temporary care for children in state custody, they do not automatically gain legal standing to challenge placement decisions or intervene in ongoing protection proceedings.
Under Maine's Child Protection Act, the Department of Health and Human Services has broad authority to make placement decisions for children in its custody. Resource parents serve as temporary caregivers during the pendency of child protection proceedings, but their role is distinct from that of adoptive parents or legal guardians who have formal parental rights.
The appellate court's decision to dismiss the appeal on procedural grounds means the former resource parents cannot challenge the Department's decision to remove the children from their care through the court system. The ruling reinforces the Department's authority over placement decisions and limits the legal recourse available to resource parents who disagree with such decisions.
The case also illustrates the complex nature of child protection proceedings, which can span multiple years. The children in this case were first placed in Department custody in 2020-2021, their biological parents' rights were terminated in March 2023, and they were subsequently placed with resource parents who cared for them until September 2024.
While the majority opinion found the orders not appealable, Chief Justice Stanfill's dissent suggests there may have been disagreement among the justices about whether the former resource parents should have been permitted to pursue their appeal. The specific grounds for the chief justice's dissent were not detailed in the available portion of the decision.
The dismissal means the case will not proceed to a substantive review of whether the former resource parents should have been allowed to intervene in the child protection proceeding or whether they were entitled to an expedited judicial review of the placement decision.
This decision may have implications for other resource parents in Maine who seek to challenge placement decisions or intervene in child protection cases. The ruling appears to reinforce the Department's discretionary authority over placement decisions while limiting the legal options available to resource parents who have formed attachments to children in their care.
The case was argued before the Maine Supreme Judicial Court on May 6, 2025, and decided on September 30, 2025. Justice Horton participated in the appeal but retired before the opinion was certified. The decision carries the citation *2025 ME 91* and was docketed as case number Yor-24-552.