Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation as a “Reasonable Effort” in Alaska CINA Cases

Commentary on Kash B. (Father) v. State of Alaska, Department of Family and Community Services, Office of Children’s Services, Supreme Court of Alaska, No. S-19210 (22 Aug 2025)

1. Introduction

The Alaska Supreme Court’s memorandum opinion in Kash B. affirms the termination of a father’s parental rights after finding (1) the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) made “reasonable efforts” to reunify the family, and (2) the father’s three successive attorneys were not constitutionally ineffective for failing to move for a separate visitation hearing. Though a memorandum decision under Appellate Rule 214(d) lacks formal precedential weight, it still offers valuable guidance on two recurring Child-in-Need-of-Aid (CINA) issues:

1. Reasonable-efforts analysis when therapeutic professionals recommend a halt to visitation.
2. Standards for ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) claims in civil termination proceedings.

The case arose from a violent domestic-violence incident in June 2022, after which Kash B. (“Father”) was arrested and his children, Ashton and Sofie, were placed with their maternal grandmother. OCS drafted a reunification case plan that included sobriety, batterer’s intervention, mental-health treatment, and visitation arrangements. However, therapeutic professionals later advised suspending visitation because the children exhibited severe regression and PTSD-type symptoms. At trial the superior court terminated Father’s rights; on appeal he challenged OCS’s efforts and his attorneys’ performance.

2. Summary of the Judgment

• Reasonable Efforts: By clear and convincing evidence, OCS provided reasonable reunification services even though it (a) maintained a single case plan for nearly two years, and (b) suspended visitation following therapeutic advice. Imperfections—such as overdue plan updates—did not render efforts unreasonable under AS 47.10.086.
• Ineffective Assistance: Father did not meet either prong of Risher v. State. Tactical reasons supported counsel’s choice not to litigate visitation while criminal charges were pending and while children’s trauma symptoms persisted.
• Result: Termination order affirmed; no reversible error identified.

3. Analysis

3.1 Precedents Cited and Their Influence

1. Sherman B., 290 P.3d 421 (Alaska 2012) – Confirmed OCS’s discretion on what services to offer and when. Used to justify limited case-plan changes.
2. Casey K., 311 P.3d 637 (Alaska 2013) – Approved reasonable efforts despite “brief lapse” in services; analogized to OCS’s overdue plan update here.
3. Doug Y., 243 P.3d 217 (Alaska 2010) – Upheld cessation of visitation where the child’s PTSD was exacerbated. Key analogue for therapeutic suspension in Kash B.
4. Kylie L., 407 P.3d 442 (Alaska 2017) – Reiterated State must work with parents “even if outlook is bleak,” cited by Father; court distinguished it by emphasizing children’s severe trauma here.
5. Annette H., Claudio P., Audrey H., Sean B. – Cluster of “reasonable efforts” cases shaping the framework for evaluating OCS conduct.
6. Risher v. State, 523 P.2d 421 (Alaska 1974) – Two-prong test for IAC in criminal cases, extended to CINA matters; applied to reject Father’s IAC claims.
7. Brad S., 563 P.3d 610 (Alaska 2025) – Permits adverse inferences from silence in CINA; illustrates tactical risk of Father testifying at a visitation hearing.

3.2 The Court’s Legal Reasoning

a) Reasonable Efforts (AS 47.10.086)
The Court parsed statutory duties: identify services, actively offer them, and document efforts. It emphasized that reasonable efforts need not be perfect and are proportionate to parental participation. Father delayed mental-health counseling for 15 months and resisted introspection, justifying OCS’s limited plan revision.

b) Visitation as a Reunification Service
Citing AS 47.10.080(p) and Doug Y., the Court held that clear therapeutic evidence of harm can override the visitation mandate. The children’s PTSD-like regression constituted “clear and convincing evidence” that visits were not in their best interests.

c) Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Applying Risher, the Court found counsel’s non-action on visitation “objectively reasonable” because:

• Litigating visitation risked cementing adverse evidence regarding the ongoing criminal assault case.
• A divided bifurcation motion might have delayed termination beyond statutory timelines, contradicting children’s need for permanency.
• Mediation and informal negotiations remained available and were in fact pursued.

Consequently, Father failed the first prong (competence), making the prejudice prong moot.

3.3 Likely Impact on Future Litigation

• Therapeutic Suspension Standardised: The decision fortifies OCS’s authority to pause visitation when qualified mental-health professionals document significant trauma responses, even for extended periods.
• Case-Plan Formalism Relaxed: Failure to update a plan every six months—though contrary to OCS policy—will not alone defeat a reasonable-efforts finding if services are in fact offered and parent non-compliance persists.
• IAC Threshold Clarified: Tactical non-litigation of visitation—particularly where criminal exposure exists—will rarely constitute ineffective assistance absent an obvious, no-risk benefit to the parent.
• Practical Guidance to Practitioners: Counsel must weigh (i) potential incriminating testimony, (ii) therapeutic evaluations, and (iii) statutory permanency timelines before filing visitation motions.

4. Complex Concepts Simplified

CINA (Child-in-Need-of-Aid)

Alaska legal designation for a child who faces abuse, neglect, or other conditions warranting State intervention.

Reasonable Efforts

Statutory requirement that OCS actively offer and document services aimed at family reunification; the standard is feasibility, not perfection.

Therapeutic Suspension of Visitation

Temporary halt to parent-child contact when clinical professionals observe visitation harms the child’s mental health.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (IAC)

Constitutional claim that an attorney’s sub-standard performance prejudiced the client; assessed under the two-part Risher test in Alaska.

Batterer’s Intervention Program

Structured course addressing domestic-violence perpetrators’ behavior, accountability, and anger management.

5. Conclusion

While labelled a non-precedential memorandum, Kash B. provides persuasive authority clarifying that (1) OCS may deem visitation contraindicated on solid therapeutic grounds and still satisfy the “reasonable efforts” mandate, and (2) counsel’s strategic avoidance of a visitation hearing—when it risks prejudicing the parent or prolonging litigation—does not equate to ineffective assistance. Future CINA litigants should expect courts to scrutinize clinical evidence of trauma, parental engagement timelines, and tactical explanations before second-guessing agency or attorney decisions. Ultimately, the decision reinforces Alaska’s jurisprudential theme: the State’s reunification duty is calibrated by the child’s best interests and the parent’s demonstrated commitment to change, not by rote procedural formalities.