D.M. v. Department of Children & Families
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1341
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- DCF filed a dependency petition for A.M., S.M., and M.M. due to domestic violence exposure and alleged abuse/abandonment; B.A. was victim of D.M.'s violence.
- Children were placed with a relative; M.M. in a therapeutic home away from siblings; A.M. and S.M. in a foster home; both parents admitted dependency findings.
- Parents were given a case plan requiring evaluations, therapy, limited contact with children, GAL and professional supervision; D.M. to attend anger management and therapy; B.A. to attend therapy to prevent further domestic violence threats.
- D.M. completed some components (parenting class, assessments, domestic violence classes) but failed to complete anger management and individual therapy (cost/resource issues cited).
- B.A. showed consistent efforts toward improvement; therapists and GAL observed positive interactions and progress, though her therapy had not yet reached full effectiveness at trial.
- DCF sought termination of parental rights after less than a year of unsatisfactory compliance by the parents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether D.M.'s rights should be terminated | D.M. failed to substantially comply and posed ongoing risk | Department faulted for delays; some services provided; risk may be mitigated | Terminated D.M.'s rights |
| Whether B.A.'s rights should be terminated | B.A. substantially failed to comply; ongoing danger absent due to noncompliance and risk of harm | B.A. made steady improvements; not enough evidence of material noncompliance | Term was reversed; rights not terminated |
| Whether GAL participation was proper and adequately considered | GAL recommendation aligned with child welfare factors | No conflict or errors in GAL's representation | No reversible error; GAL properly participated |
Key Cases Cited
- Padgett v. Dep’t of Health & Rehab. Servs., 577 So.2d 565 (Fla. 1991) (clear-and-convincing standard for substantial risk and least-restrictive means)
- C.G. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 67 So.3d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (good-faith efforts required to rehabilitate and unify family)
- E.R. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 937 So.2d 1196 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (no reversible error where evidence shows no reasonable basis parent will improve)
- L.A.G. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 963 So.2d 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (reversal where record showed mother's efforts to comply)
- L.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 957 So.2d 1203 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (evidence of continued harm absent adequate services)
- M.E. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 919 So.2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (consideration of services feasibility and child protection)
- T.V. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 905 So.2d 945 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (standard of review for termination—substantial evidence)