A.T. v. A.M. (Appeal from Tuscaloosa Juvenile Court: JU-17-643.03)., CL-2024-0644

A.T. (the father) appealed judgments from Tuscaloosa Juvenile Court terminating his parental rights to two children, K.T. (born 2016) and G.R. (born 2017).
Both children were removed from the father's and mother's care in 2017 after being found malnourished and neglected; K.T. presented at 13 months with severe malnutrition, and G.R. with dehydration, hypothermia, and a pressure ulcer.
The father was convicted of reckless endangerment regarding one child, while the mother was convicted of two counts of felony child abuse and consented to termination of her rights.
Both children have lived for years with relatives (W.T. and A.M.) who provide stable, nurturing homes and wish to adopt them.
The father had minimal contact with the children since 2019 and did not maintain virtual visitations offered during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The juvenile court found clear and convincing evidence of abandonment, inability to discharge parental responsibilities, and a lack of viable alternatives to termination.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Was there sufficient evidence of abandonment or other grounds for termination?	A.T.: Insufficient evidence supports abandonment or parental unfitness	W.T./A.M.: Evidence shows abandonment, neglect, and no parental efforts	Sufficient clear and convincing evidence that A.T. abandoned the children and could not parent
2. Was there a need to consider viable alternatives to termination?	A.T.: Termination must consider alternatives	W.T./A.M.: Abandonment removes due-process right to alternatives	No need to consider alternatives due to finding of abandonment
3. Would terminating parental rights serve children's best interests?	A.T.: No, given lack of evidence of harm or bond with custodians	W.T./A.M.: Children are bonded to custodians and have been abused/neglected	Termination serves best interests and allows for adoption and permanency
4. Was evidence of unexplained physical injury sufficient?	A.T.: Malnourishment/ulcers insufficient as injury	W.T./A.M.: Injuries indicate neglect/intentional conduct	Juvenile court properly considered malnutrition and ulcer as consequences of neglect

A.D. v. R.P., 345 So. 3d 657 (Ala. Civ. App. 2021) (abandonment by clear and convincing evidence allows termination without considering alternatives)
S.N.W. v. M.D.F.H., 127 So. 3d 1225 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013) (no viable alternatives when there is no relationship and adoptive resource is available)
J.S. v. J.C. and C.C., 219 So. 3d 666 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016) (balancing benefits of adoption against status quo in termination cases)
Ex parte McInish, 47 So. 3d 767 (Ala. 2008) (standard for clear and convincing evidence on appeal)
C.O. v. Jefferson Cnty. Dep’t of Hum. Res., 206 So. 3d 621 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016) (definition of clear and convincing evidence in termination of parental rights)