In re Jewelyette M. — dissenting

Summary

Justice Elgo, joined by Justice D’Auria, dissented from the majority’s conclusion that nonrelative foster parents may seek permissive intervention in the dispositional phase of neglect proceedings. The dissent would construe the statutory scheme as limiting such foster parents to notice and an opportunity to be heard and comment, because foster parents have no constitutional family-integrity interest, are subject to the department’s control, and are required to support permanency and reunification efforts. The dissent also would deny the foster parents’ writ of error. Justice D’Auria separately would have dismissed the matters as moot, while Chief Justice Mullins, joined in part by Justice Alexander, would permit intervention only rarely and would construe the right to be heard more narrowly than the majority.