Actually, court is worthy an entry all by itself--seriously--but more importantly were the outcomes.

Cookie's mom hadn't been served with our motion 3 days in advance; and a "service plan" (things mom had to do to get Cookie back) wasn't prepared yet. The service plan would lay out what level of parental rights and/or custody mom could have of Cookie--and therefore, how much sense it would make to allow us to intervene on the case. After all: if mom was getting the baby back and just had things that CPS would require of her--they wouldn't allow us to intervene.

But at the end of that hearing, Cookie was remaining in the care and custody of the state.

None-the-less, our motion to intervene was "carried". So it wasn't approved but it wasn't denied. Since the mother's lawyer had been served and he refused to accept, the judge allowed the hearing to be paused so that our lawyer's assistant could go get the document necessary to serve Cookie's mom. The assistant wasn't allowed to serve mom, so the judge told her to have the Deputy serve the mom. The Deputy came into the court room because he needed the judge to tell him to serve mom. Mom was finally served.

While we were waiting for the assistant to get the document, the judge tried to proceed "assuming mom would be served" and carried that motion; but ordered an ICPC (Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children) study be done on Matt and I (this is a study to show that we and our home were safe and stable for the placement of a foster child--and because we're already actively licensed with the state, it will go MUCH faster). When his court clerk asked if it should be expedited, he noted that Cookie was under 2 years old and said that it should be. An expedited study SHOULD only take 27 business days. There are 21 business days from court date to court date. But since the bulk of the work (the homestudy) is actually completed--I'm PRAYING that it's possible to be finished and approved by the next court hearing.

The judge also made us a "party to the case"--meaning we are now "part" of Cookie's case and recognized by the court as people who are involved as opposed to just being onlookers.

The next court date is May 19th. I'm going. Actually, I may have to testify and wouldn't have a choice--but I'm going regardless. Matt and I agree that there are too many little things that could come up that our lawyer won't know inside and out, but that I might know about and can whisper into her ear. One of us needs to be there.

May 19th is one year from the day she left our home. Very odd. It's also 6 months from the day the baby (our adoptive placement) came INto our home--and therefore, the first day we could legally finalize her adoption.