One of the reasons in Minnesota Law for a child to need protection or services is that a child is without their parent, guardian or custodian. AF is not legally any of those things right now, so it is straightforward and without blame for AF to say the children are in need of protection or services (CHIPS).Can someone possibly explain their opinion why AF would say the children need protective services? What exactly does this mean? I’m glad Maddi’s parents will retain custody right now and pray it stays that way.
ETA: MK is the only one right now who fits the definition. Her parents do not, even though they currently care for the children. In MK's absence Winona County becomes the guardian/custodian.
Source: The definition of Child in need of protection and services in Subd. 6 of the statue below.