BERKELY RISK SOLUTIONS, LLC VS. INDUSTRIAL Â RE-INTERNATIONAL, INC.(L-0163-15, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-2366-15T1

Background

Mother (T.N.) has a long history of substance abuse and untreated mental-health disorders; Division custody of her son L.L. was granted in December 2013 and a guardianship complaint filed December 2014.
L.L. (born 2009) was developmentally delayed, nonverbal, and in diapers at removal; paternal grandparents became his resource/placement family.
From 2011–2015 Mother repeatedly failed to engage in or comply with substance‑abuse and mental‑health services, tested positive for multiple substances, and was negatively discharged from programs.
Mother completed an intensive program shortly before the 2016 termination trial, obtained housing and a car, but the Division's expert (Dr. Brandwein) found her prognosis extremely poor and still a high child‑neglect risk.
Trial court found the Division met the statutory prongs for terminating parental rights and that adoption by the paternal grandparents was in L.L.’s best interest; Mother appealed and the Appellate Division affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Division proved harm and inability/unwillingness to eliminate harm under N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(a)(1)–(2)	Division: Mother's chronic substance abuse, untreated mental illness, housing instability and noncompliance caused ongoing harm and prevented safe parenting	Mother: Recent treatment, sobriety period, housing and transport show progress and more time would allow reunification	Held: Substantial credible evidence of chronic abuse/mental illness and noncompliance; Mother’s late efforts were insufficient and too late to obviate harm
Whether the Division made reasonable efforts to provide services (prong 3)	Division: Provided extensive services over years and pursued alternatives	Mother: Pointed to unsubstantiated referrals and contended some positives were prescription or grief-related	Held: Court credited Division’s efforts; unsubstantiated referrals were given little weight; prong satisfied
Whether termination would do more harm than good (prong 4 / bonding analysis)	Division: Expert found secure bond with paternal grandparents; severing that bond would be devastating; separation from mother would be less harmful	Mother: Continued bond claims and request for additional time to stabilize	Held: Evidence showed stronger, secure bond with grandparents and weaker, insecure bond with Mother; termination favored child’s best interest
Whether trial court erred in weighing recent pretrial improvements	Division: Even with recent progress, expert found prognosis poor and need for prolonged demonstrated stability before reunification	Mother: Argued a one‑year delay would not harm the child and would permit reunification	Held: Court applied New Jersey’s permanency emphasis and determined delay would risk child’s wellbeing; affirmed termination

Key Cases Cited

In re Guardianship of K.H.O., 161 N.J. 337 (1999) (harm from parental dereliction and substance abuse supports termination analysis)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. F.M., 211 N.J. 420 (2012) (standard of review and clear‑and‑convincing evidence requirement)
In re Guardianship of J.N.H., 172 N.J. 440 (2002) (limited appellate review of termination findings)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. I.S., 202 N.J. 145 (2010) (state policy favoring permanency and limiting protracted reunification efforts)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. A.W., 103 N.J. 591 (1986) (children’s perception of time and harms of delay in permanency)
N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. N.C.M., 438 N.J. Super. 356 (App. Div. 2014) (deference to family court fact‑finding and expertise)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. G.L., 191 N.J. 596 (2007) (prong four as a fail‑safe balancing potential harms)