A. H. v. Florida Department of Children & Family Services
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6751
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- A.H. appeals a trial court order terminating his parental rights to his two daughters, both initials A.H.
- The death of a three-year-old son in 2008 following a brain injury led the Department to file a shelter petition and place the daughters with their maternal grandmother.
- The trial court adjudicated the daughters dependent, and S.S. (the mother) was arrested in connection with the son's death.
- The Department initially aimed for reunification with A.H., but after nine months the court changed the permanency goal to adoption and the Department filed for termination.
- The amended petition alleged five grounds for termination under section 39.806(l): abandonment (l)(b), threatened health (l)(c), failed to substantially comply (l)(e), egregious conduct (l)(f), and aggravated child abuse (l)(g).
- The trial court terminated parental rights on all five grounds, but on appeal the court reversed, finding no competent substantial evidence supporting any ground.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Section 39.806(l)(f) - failure to protect from egregious conduct | A.H. argues he knew of risks and failed to prevent. | Department asserts egregious conduct by mother, with A.H. having opportunity to prevent. | Not proven; grounds for l(f) not supported. |
| Section 39.806(l)(g) - subjected child to aggravated child abuse | A.H. did not knowingly abuse; mother bore sole responsibility. | Department contends A.H. subjected child to aggravated abuse by remaining with mother. | Not proven; evidence insufficient. |
| Section 39.806(l)(e) - substantial compliance with case plan | Department failed to prove that noncompliance endangered the child; substantial compliance not shown. | Department claims noncompliance with plan. | Not proven; no substantial threat to safety shown. |
| Section 39.806(l)(b) - abandonment | Department claims abandonment based on visitation and support failures. | Guardian ad litem and grandmother testified to regular visitation and support. | Not proven; abandonment unsupported by competent substantial evidence. |
| Section 39.806(l)(c) - continued involvement threatens health | Evidence shows potential risk from father's continued involvement. | Evidence insufficient to show threat from father’s involvement. | Not proven; termination under this ground not supported. |
Key Cases Cited
- L.W. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 71 So.3d 221 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (abandonment requires meaningful contact and support; findings here insufficient)
- N.L. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 843 So.2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (substantial compliance requires more than incomplete plan)
- In re B.S., 697 So.2d 914 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (egregious conduct basis requires knowledge and prevention opportunity)
- M.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 765 So.2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (substantial compliance analysis; return would not endanger child)
- R.A. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 30 So.3d 722 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (substantial compliance requires remedy of circumstances; endangerment not shown)
- R.L. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 63 So.3d 920 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (elements of termination: statutory ground, best interests, least restrictive means)
- B.L. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 950 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (substantial compliance is more than incompletion; safety implications required)