ARC v. State, Department of Family Services, 258 P.3d 704

Mother and her two children ARC and RMR were removed from the home in March 2008 after police and DFS found drugs and drug paraphernalia in the home, with Mother alleged to have neglected the children.
DFS substantiated neglect and Mother stipulated to an adjudication of neglect; DFS and Mother entered a family service plan prioritizing reunification and requiring sobriety, housing, employment, parenting and violence counseling, and visitation.
Mother largely failed to comply with the first plan, missing UAs (many positive), declining intensive treatment, and providing little documentation of attendance at parenting or domestic violence programs or employment.
A second plan in October 2008 continued reunification as goal but added guardianship/adoption as concurrent; it required intensive outpatient/inpatient treatment, bed date for inpatient care, ongoing UAs, and continued services, with documentation to prove compliance.
Children were placed with relatives then returned to the original foster family; by 2009, despite multiple opportunities, Mother had not completed treatment or demonstrated sustained sobriety, and hearings led to a plan for termination and adoption/guardianship.
In 2009 DFS filed petitions to terminate parental rights; after an evidentiary hearing, the district court terminated Mother’s parental rights; the fathers’ rights to ARC and RMR were also terminated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DFS proved unfitness by clear and convincing evidence	Mother	DFS	Affirmed; evidence supported unfitness
Whether DFS proved reasonable efforts to rehabilitate the family under §14-2-309(a)(iii)	Mother	DFS	Affirmed; DFS made reasonable efforts
Whether the children's health and safety would be seriously jeopardized by returning to Mother	Mother	DFS	Affirmed; substantial risk due to ongoing drug issues and noncompliance

SLB v. JEO, 136 P.3d 799 (Wyoming 2006) (termination review standard; clear and convincing evidence required)
SLJ v. Dep't of Family Servs., 104 P.3d 74 (Wyoming 2005) (clear and convincing evidence standard in termination)
CL v. Wyo. Dep't of Family Servs., 151 P.3d 1102 (Wyoming 2007) (strict scrutiny to protect family integrity; least intrusive means)
RS v. Dep't of Family Servs., 94 P.3d 1025 (Wyoming 2004) (three elements for §14-2-309(a)(iii) termination)
MN v. Dep't of Family Servs., 78 P.3d 232 (Wyoming 2008) (fitness includes ability to meet ongoing physical, mental, emotional needs)
AJJ v. State of Wyo., Dep't of Family Servs., 242 P.3d 968 (Wyoming 2010) (guardianship as potential less intrusive option; unresolved in this context)
TWE v. Dep't of Family Servs., 222 P.3d 142 (Wyoming 2009) (drug use alone not always terminating; context matters)