Court of Appeals Clarifies Procedure for Ordering Psychiatric Evaluations of Minors in Family Court

• View Larger Image

Court of Appeals Clarifies Procedure for Ordering Psychiatric Evaluations of Minors in Family Court

Court of Appeals Clarifies Procedure for Ordering Psychiatric Evaluations of Minors in Family Court
Understanding the two-step process required under South Carolina law

The South Carolina Court of Appeals recently issued an important decision clarifying the procedures family courts must follow when ordering psychiatric evaluations for minors. In South Carolina Department of Social Services v. Caldwell (Opinion No. 6091, filed October 16, 2024), the court reversed a family court order that attempted to bypass required procedural steps.

The Case Background
The case arose from a DSS abuse and neglect action involving a seventeen-year-old minor, J.S., who was on probation with the Department of Juvenile Justice. Due to a lack of foster care options, J.S. had been living at the county DSS offices for one month, where he exhibited various behavioral issues including drug use, inappropriate remarks to staff, unauthorized departures, and disruption of multiple foster care placements.

Concerned about J.S.’s mental health, behavioral issues, and safety, the family court ordered the Department of Mental Health (DMH) to admit him for an inpatient psychological evaluation. DMH appealed this order, arguing the family court had not followed the proper statutory procedure.

The Court’s Ruling
The Court of Appeals reversed the family court’s order, holding that the plain language of S.C. Code § 44-24-150 requires a specific two-step process that cannot be bypassed, even in urgent situations.

The Required Two-Step Process
Under Section 44-24-150, family courts must follow this sequence:

Step 1: Community Mental Health Center Evaluation

The family court may order a child who is before the court on another matter to receive a psychiatric evaluation by the appropriate community mental health center

The community mental health center must schedule the evaluation as soon as possible
The center must provide a written report to the family court within five working days following the evaluation

Step 2: Inpatient Evaluation (Only If Recommended)

Only after receiving the community mental health center’s report may the family court proceed

If the community mental health center reports that the child needs an inpatient psychiatric evaluation, then the family court may commit the child to a hospital designated by DMH for such evaluation

Without this recommendation, the family court lacks authority to order inpatient evaluation

Why This Matters
This decision reinforces several important principles in South Carolina family law:

Procedural Requirements Matter: Even when a family court judge has legitimate concerns about a child’s mental health and safety, the court must follow statutory procedures. Good intentions do not override clear statutory requirements.

Community-Based Evaluation First: The statute reflects a legislative preference for less restrictive, community-based evaluations before resorting to inpatient hospitalization. This approach respects both the child’s liberty interests and the expertise of community mental health professionals in determining the appropriate level of care.

Protection Against Improper “Safekeeping”: While the Court of Appeals did not reach DMH’s constitutional arguments, the decision helps prevent family courts from using inpatient mental health facilities as placement options when other resources are unavailable. Mental health facilities are for treatment, not temporary housing.

Practical Implications for Family Law Practice
Attorneys practicing in South Carolina family courts should be aware of these key takeaways:

1. Always Request Community Evaluation First: When seeking a psychiatric evaluation for a minor client or child involved in a case, ensure the motion requests evaluation by the community mental health center as the first step.

2. Document the Community Center’s Recommendation: Before requesting an inpatient evaluation order, ensure the community mental health center has completed its evaluation and specifically recommended inpatient assessment in writing.

3. Timing Considerations: Factor in the evaluation timeline when planning case strategy. The community mental health center must provide its report within five working days of the evaluation, but scheduling the initial evaluation may take additional time.

4. Mootness But Continuing Significance: Although the specific case became moot after DMH admitted J.S., the Court of Appeals addressed the issue because it is “capable of repetition, but which will frequently become moot before it can be reviewed.” This means the procedural holding will apply to future cases.

Questions About Mental Health Evaluations in Family Court Cases?
If you have questions about obtaining mental health evaluations for a child involved in a family court matter, or if you are facing issues related to abuse and neglect proceedings, our firm has experience navigating these complex situations.

Understanding and following proper procedures can make the difference between an order that stands and one that gets reversed on appeal, potentially causing delays in getting necessary services for children in need.

This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique and requires individual analysis.

By Suzanne Klok|2025-11-12T16:55:52+00:00November 15th, 2024|Child Abuse and Neglect, Family Law|Comments Off on Court of Appeals Clarifies Procedure for Ordering Psychiatric Evaluations of Minors in Family Court

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

About the Author: Suzanne Klok

Related Posts

What to Wear to South Carolina Family Court Hearings

South Carolina Rule 21 Updates 2025: Temporary Hearings

Passport Provisions in SC Custody Orders: Complete Guide for Parents

Answering Discovery in SC Family Court: What You Must Know

Supreme Court Clarifies “Timely” Rule 59(e) Motions in Family Court

Court of Appeals Clarifies Procedure for Ordering Psychiatric Evaluations of Minors in Family Court
Understanding the two-step process required under South Carolina law

The South Carolina Court of Appeals recently issued an important decision clarifying the procedures family courts must follow when ordering psychiatric evaluations for minors. In South Carolina Department of Social Services v. Caldwell (Opinion No. 6091, filed October 16, 2024), the court reversed a family court order that attempted to bypass required procedural steps.

The Case Background
The case arose from a DSS abuse and neglect action involving a seventeen-year-old minor, J.S., who was on probation with the Department of Juvenile Justice. Due to a lack of foster care options, J.S. had been living at the county DSS offices for one month, where he exhibited various behavioral issues including drug use, inappropriate remarks to staff, unauthorized departures, and disruption of multiple foster care placements.

Concerned about J.S.’s mental health, behavioral issues, and safety, the family court ordered the Department of Mental Health (DMH) to admit him for an inpatient psychological evaluation. DMH appealed this order, arguing the family court had not followed the proper statutory procedure.

The Court’s Ruling
The Court of Appeals reversed the family court’s order, holding that the plain language of S.C. Code § 44-24-150 requires a specific two-step process that cannot be bypassed, even in urgent situations.

The Required Two-Step Process
Under Section 44-24-150, family courts must follow this sequence:

Step 1: Community Mental Health Center Evaluation

The family court may order a child who is before the court on another matter to receive a psychiatric evaluation by the appropriate community mental health center

The community mental health center must schedule the evaluation as soon as possible
The center must provide a written report to the family court within five working days following the evaluation

Step 2: Inpatient Evaluation (Only If Recommended)

Only after receiving the community mental health center’s report may the family court proceed

If the community mental health center reports that the child needs an inpatient psychiatric evaluation, then the family court may commit the child to a hospital designated by DMH for such evaluation

Without this recommendation, the family court lacks authority to order inpatient evaluation

Why This Matters
This decision reinforces several important principles in South Carolina family law:

Procedural Requirements Matter: Even when a family court judge has legitimate concerns about a child’s mental health and safety, the court must follow statutory procedures. Good intentions do not override clear statutory requirements.

Community-Based Evaluation First: The statute reflects a legislative preference for less restrictive, community-based evaluations before resorting to inpatient hospitalization. This approach respects both the child’s liberty interests and the expertise of community mental health professionals in determining the appropriate level of care.

Protection Against Improper “Safekeeping”: While the Court of Appeals did not reach DMH’s constitutional arguments, the decision helps prevent family courts from using inpatient mental health facilities as placement options when other resources are unavailable. Mental health facilities are for treatment, not temporary housing.

Practical Implications for Family Law Practice
Attorneys practicing in South Carolina family courts should be aware of these key takeaways:

1. Always Request Community Evaluation First: When seeking a psychiatric evaluation for a minor client or child involved in a case, ensure the motion requests evaluation by the community mental health center as the first step.

2. Document the Community Center’s Recommendation: Before requesting an inpatient evaluation order, ensure the community mental health center has completed its evaluation and specifically recommended inpatient assessment in writing.

3. Timing Considerations: Factor in the evaluation timeline when planning case strategy. The community mental health center must provide its report within five working days of the evaluation, but scheduling the initial evaluation may take additional time.

4. Mootness But Continuing Significance: Although the specific case became moot after DMH admitted J.S., the Court of Appeals addressed the issue because it is “capable of repetition, but which will frequently become moot before it can be reviewed.” This means the procedural holding will apply to future cases.

Questions About Mental Health Evaluations in Family Court Cases?
If you have questions about obtaining mental health evaluations for a child involved in a family court matter, or if you are facing issues related to abuse and neglect proceedings, our firm has experience navigating these complex situations.

Understanding and following proper procedures can make the difference between an order that stands and one that gets reversed on appeal, potentially causing delays in getting necessary services for children in need.

This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique and requires individual analysis.