In re Jewelyette M. — concurring in part and dissenting in part

Summary

The opinion agrees that foster parents are not statutorily barred from seeking permissive intervention in neglect proceedings, but maintains that satisfying the governing factors should be rare because foster parents generally lack an unrepresented interest and their participation may delay permanency decisions. It disagrees with treating the statutory right to be heard as ordinarily including presence throughout the proceeding, concluding instead that foster parents are entitled to submit an oral or written statement at a time determined by the trial court. Chief Justice Mullins, joined in part by Justice Alexander, therefore concurs in part and dissents in part from the majority's reasoning.