Department cites visit incidents and missing treatment records in defense of supervised visitation

Madeline Ebel, attorney for the Department of Children, Youth, and Families, defended the juvenile court's decision to require supervised visitation, saying the record showed provider recommendations and safety concerns that justified supervision.

Ebel described provider findings and visit incidents in detail, saying, "JLP repeatedly challenged visitation supervision, violated boundaries set by visitation providers, acted in a confrontational manner, and threatened visit supervisors." She also said children injured each other and ran away during visits and that a provider recommended offender treatment that JLP refused to engage in.

Ebel told the commissioner the juvenile court had evidence supporting a supervision order and that the court's decision to decline relocation of visits to Vancouver or Longview was reasonable because the children responded well to predictable routines and were harmed by excessive disruption.

The department also said there was no provider information in the record about the mother's treatment goals or progress and argued that attending counseling is not the same as engaging in treatment goals; according to Ebel, the absence of corroborating records supported the partial-compliance finding.