In re Welfare of P.J.K.

369 N.W.2d 286 (1985)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Welfare of P.J.K.

Minnesota Supreme Court
369 N.W.2d 286 (1985)

Facts

Father (defendant) and Mother were both mentally handicapped and had two children who were also mentally handicapped. After Father and Mother divorced, the children lived with Mother in such horrible conditions that they were adjudicated dependent and placed in a shelter. While the children were in Mother’s care, Father did not show any concern for how the children lived and did not visit them. However, after the children were removed from Mother, Father sought custody. Subsequently, a custody study was performed, which indicated that custody of the children should remain with Hennepin County (plaintiff). The custody study noted Father’s slow rate of learning, his temper, his inability to keep a job, and his limited ability to comprehend his children’s special needs. Father acknowledged the children’s dependency, and a court ordered Father to participate in parenting classes, counseling, a psychological evaluation, and supervised visitation. Father did participate in a group parenting class. However, the psychologist teaching the class recommended that Father cease his participation, stating that the class was of no benefit to Father because he was unable to understand or contribute to class discussions on various topics. Father did not participate in other parenting classes as the psychologist recommended. Additionally, Father verbally abused social workers and the children’s foster parents. For example, during one visit, Father shook his fist at the children’s foster mother because she took a toy from the children that had sharp ends to prevent the boys from possibly injuring their eyes. The children reacted poorly to visits with Father, which occurred rarely, wetting the bed afterward, and the like. Visits had to be suspended altogether after one altercation. After visits resumed, Father went an entire year without seeing the children. It was clear that Father loved the children, but he could not grasp the simplest of parenting skills or provide the type of care the children would need to develop fully, given their mental and emotional handicaps. A juvenile court terminated Father’s parental rights. An appellate court reversed, and the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Yetka, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership