Dcpp v. T.A. and A.D., in the Matter of the Guardianship of Z.A.
A-3451-23
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Tanya (T.A.) appealed the termination of her parental rights to her child Zoe (Z.A.) after a five-day Family Part trial in New Jersey.
- Both Tanya and the child tested positive for PCP at Zoe's birth, prompting involvement by the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency (the Division).
- Tanya has a long history with the Division, including prior child removals and terminations due to ongoing substance abuse and mental health issues.
- Despite repeated offers, Tanya either refused or failed to engage in court-ordered and Division-provided services regarding substance abuse, mental health, and visitation.
- The child was placed with Gloria, a family friend closely involved with the child's extended family; expert testimony confirmed a secure parent-child bond between Zoe and Gloria.
- At trial, the court found the Division's witnesses and expert evidence credible, and found Tanya not credible or cooperative; the court terminated Tanya’s parental rights and Tanya appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasonable Efforts (Prong 3) | Division provided comprehensive services and supports | Division failed to provide reasonable services | Division met the statutory requirement for reasonable efforts |
| Permanent Placement (Prong 3) | Resource parent committed to adoption, not KLG | No clear commitment to adoption by resource parent | Resource parent committed; court’s finding was well supported |
| Harm/Benefit Analysis (Prong 4) | Termination is less harmful, child bonded to resource parent | Termination would cause more harm than good | Termination would not do more harm than good; permanency needed |
| Ineffective Assistance | Counsel’s performance within professional norms | Counsel's errors prejudiced outcome | No ineffective assistance; outcome would not have changed |
Key Cases Cited
- Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394 (deference to trial court’s fact-finding in family cases)
- N.J. Div. of Youth & Fam. Servs. v. B.R., 192 N.J. 301 (ineffective assistance standard in TPR cases)
- N.J. Div. of Youth & Fam. Servs. v. I.S., 202 N.J. 145 (best interest standard and parental fitness)
- In re Guardianship of K.H.O., 161 N.J. 337 (harm/benefit analysis in TPR)
- N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. D.C.A., 256 N.J. 4 (appellate standard of review in child protection)
- N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. A.B., 231 N.J. 354 (de novo review of legal conclusions in TPR)