2013 WL 8609252
Del. Fm. Ct.2013Background
- DFS filed a Petition for Termination and Transfer of Parental Rights seeking to terminate Mother Adriana Garcias and Father Felipe Garcia-Morale with respect to Sonia Garcias-Morale (b. 2005) and Esmeralda Garcias-Morale (b. 2007).
- DFS seeks termination of Mother’s rights under 13 Del. C. § 1103(a)(5) for failure to plan for the children’s physical and mental health and development, and termination of Father’s rights under 13 Del. C. § 1103(a)(2) for abandonment, plus a § 1103(a)(5) claim against Father.
- Hearing held September 13, 2013; Father, deported to Mexico, did not participate; Mother represented; Guardian ad Litem appointed; DFS relied on a 2011–2012 Case Plan history showing persistent housing, health, and supervision concerns.
- Children have been in DFS care since June 22, 2011; the Cousins’ guardianship petition was withdrawn; the DFS foster placement with Shannon Cliff has continued; both children are high-need and have special education and therapy needs.
- DFS sought to terminate parental rights to promote adoption; DFS argued that continued parental rights would destabilize the children; Court conducted a best-interest analysis and concluded termination is in the children’s best interests.
- Court’s decision orders termination of both parents’ rights and DFS custody remains with the agency for adoption.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mother’s failure to plan supports termination. | DFS proved by clear and convincing evidence that Mother failed to adequately plan for the children’s needs. | Mother argues some plan elements were satisfied and progress made; inconsistencies exist. | Yes; Mother failed to adequately plan under §1103(a)(5). |
| Whether Father abandoned the children. | DFS showed a settled purpose to abandon, with no contact or support during the relevant period. | Father contested the characterization given his incarceration and deportation. | Yes; Father abandoned under §1103(a)(2). |
| Whether DFS made reasonable efforts to reunify. | DFS provided a Court-approved Case Plan for Mother and attempted to engage Father through publication and notices. | Father’s absence and deportation prevented meaningful reunification efforts. | Yes; DFS made reasonable efforts to reunify for both parents. |
| Whether termination is in the children’s best interests. | Given multiple risks and high-need status, termination best serves stability and adoptability. | Mother emphasizes bond and desire for reunification. | Yes; termination is in Sonia and Esmeralda’s best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shepherd v. Clemens, 752 A.2d 533 (Del. 2000) (en banc; dissenting opinion cited for context on parental rights)
- In re Stevens, 652 A.2d 18 (Del. 1995) (best interests and permanency considerations in child custody)
- Patricia A.F. v. James R.F., 451 A.2d 830 (Del. 1982) (earlier progeny on termination and permanency factors)
- Barr v. Division of Family Services, 974 A.2d 88 (Del. 2009) (standard for evaluating termination grounds and best interests)
- Division of Family Services v. Hutton, 765 A.2d 1267 (Del. 2001) (statutory framework for termination and reunification considerations)