Chandler-Sivage v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2017 Ark. App. 544
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- DHS filed dependency-neglect petition after reports of Chandler’s drug use and mental-health issues; children placed in emergency custody following Chandler’s October 2015 arrest on serious drug charges.
- Circuit court adjudicated K.A. and C.C. dependent-neglected for inadequate supervision due to Chandler’s drug use and arrest; ordered services (drug/alcohol assessment and treatment, psychological evaluation, parenting classes, stable housing/income/transportation, random screens).
- Chandler was incarcerated for much of the case; released August 31, 2016, but had subsequent arrests, a DWI, and an outstanding warrant.
- DHS filed to terminate parental rights December 22, 2016; termination hearing held January 23, 2017.
- Court found three statutory grounds (failure to remedy, subsequent factors, aggravated circumstances), concluded children were adoptable, and ruled termination was in children’s best interest based on ongoing substance abuse, criminal behavior, instability, and risk of potential harm.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Chandler) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supported termination as in children’s best interest | Chandler had made sufficient progress after release (treatment, NA/AA, classes), obtained housing/employment/transportation, and children were placed with relatives so permanency not at risk | Continued instability, ongoing substance use, criminal behavior, incarceration, and lack of completed case-plan services presented a risk of potential harm | Affirmed: clear-and-convincing evidence supported best-interest finding and risk of potential harm |
| Whether relative placement eliminated need for termination | Placement with relatives provided permanency and protection; custody to relatives or no-contact order could suffice | Placement was foster-care with relatives, not proven permanent; speculation cannot replace evidence of permanent custody | Affirmed: no evidence relatives had agreed to or obtained permanent custody; speculation insufficient |
| Whether recent improvements should prevent termination | Chandler’s recent engagement in treatment and negative drug screen showed progress and sobriety | Court may consider whole case history; recent progress does not necessarily negate long-term risk or failure to remedy conditions | Affirmed: court weighed entire record and credibility; recent improvements went to weight, not controlling where overall risk remained |
| Standard of review for termination findings | N/A (procedural) | N/A | Appellate review is de novo but facts reviewed for clear-and-convincing evidence; trial court credibility determinations are given deference |
Key Cases Cited
- Ivers v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 250 S.W.3d 279 (Ark. Ct. App.) (parental progress can preclude termination where compliance and responsibility are shown)
- Rhine v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 386 S.W.3d 577 (Ark. Ct. App.) (minor lapses not necessarily evidence of future harm)
- Prows v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 283 S.W.3d 637 (Ark. Ct. App.) (trial court should consider recent mental stability when relevant to termination)
- Brumley v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2015 Ark. 356 (Ark.) (appellate courts defer to trial court credibility assessments in termination cases)
- McMahan v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 472 S.W.3d 518 (Ark. Ct. App.) (best-interest analysis relies on record of parent’s compliance throughout dependency-neglect case)