Chastity S. v. Dcs
1 CA-JV 16-0309
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Jan 31, 2017Background
- Mother (Chastity S.) had two children, A.L. and J.L.; DCS removed them after reports of domestic violence in the children’s presence, lack of utilities/food, drug activity in the home, untreated medical and educational needs, and mother’s substance use and mental-health issues.
- DCS filed dependency petitions; the juvenile court adjudicated the children dependent and ordered reunification services (substance treatment, psychological evaluation, individual counseling, supervised visits, etc.).
- Mother remained in the same home (which she admitted was a trigger for drug use), missed multiple psychological evaluations, and failed domestic-violence treatment (closed out for nonattendance). A psychological evaluation in May 2016 diagnosed bipolar disorder, stimulant-use disorder, and borderline intellectual functioning.
- The children had been in out-of-home placement for over two years by the time of the contested severance hearing in July 2016; DCS identified adoptive placements and reported the placements met the children’s needs.
- The juvenile court found DCS proved the statutory ground of cumulative fifteen-months out-of-home placement and that severance was in the children’s best interests; the court terminated mother’s parental rights. Mother appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether clear and convincing evidence supported termination under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(c) — 15 cumulative months out-of-home plus inability to remedy conditions and substantial likelihood of not being able to parent in near future | Mother: She participated in services, completed substance-abuse treatment, tested clean much of the time, and had been sober for nearly two years, so she had remedied the conditions | DCS: Mother had not completed required therapy or domestic-violence treatment, lived in a trigger home with drug activity, and mental-health provider said children could not be returned until treatment goals and moving from home were achieved | Held: Affirmed — evidence clearly and convincingly supported the statutory ground; mother had not remedied circumstances and posed substantial likelihood of continued inability to parent in near future |
| Whether severance was in the children’s best interests (preponderance standard) | Mother: Court erred; DCS failed to show children would benefit from severance or be harmed by continuation of the relationship; bond favors preserving the relationship | DCS: Children were adoptable, placements were meeting needs and providing permanency/stability; mother’s mental health, unresolved treatment, and unsafe home undermined safe reunification | Held: Affirmed — considering totality of circumstances, bond not dispositive; evidence supported best-interest finding given adoptability, stable placements, and risks if returned to mother |
Key Cases Cited
- Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 246 (clarifies parental-rights severance standard and that parental rights are not absolute)
- Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (defines clear-and-convincing standard and best-interest preponderance standard in severance proceedings)
- Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278 (appellate deference to juvenile court factfinding in dependency/severance cases)
- Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (adoptability and current placement meeting child’s needs as factors supporting best-interest finding)
- Dominque M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 240 Ariz. 96 (best-interest inquiry requires totality of circumstances; bond is a factor but not dispositive)
- Maricopa Cty. Juv. Action No. JS-500274, 167 Ariz. 1 (best-interest inquiry requires showing how child benefits from severance or is harmed by continued relationship)
- Maricopa Cty. Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348 (clarifies that DCS need not have a specific adoption plan before severance; showing adoptability suffices)