In re Jewelyette M. — dissenting

Summary

This dissent would reject permissive intervention by nonrelative foster parents in neglect proceedings, reasoning that their statutory role is limited to receiving notice and being heard about the child's best interests. It emphasizes that biological parents retain a fundamental interest in family integrity, while foster parents' rights are statutory and subject to the department's control and reunification obligations. Justice Elgo, joined by Justice D’Auria, would affirm removal of the foster parents as intervenors and deny their writ of error; Justice D’Auria separately would dismiss the matters as moot, while Chief Justice Mullins would permit intervention only rarely but construe the right to be heard more narrowly.