Edgar v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2017 Ark. App. 312
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Children A.E. and A.N. were removed after a 2013 domestic-violence incident in which A.E. was injured; ADHS obtained emergency custody and the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected.
- Appellant (mother) was placed on a reunification case plan (drug testing, parenting, counseling, domestic-violence classes, stable housing, etc.); children were placed with maternal grandmother and then returned to mother in Oct. 2014 after apparent compliance.
- Between late 2015 and Jan. 2016 problems recurred: mother tested positive for opiates without matching prescription, housing/rent issues, inadequate supervision, and cleanliness concerns; ADHS removed the children again in Jan. 2016.
- ADHS pursued services and recommended goal change to TPR in mid-2016 after additional incidents (crib/containment of child, father’s relapse and death, ongoing parental noncompliance).
- ADHS filed a TPR petition (grounds: failure to remedy conditions, subsequent factors making return contrary to children’s welfare, and aggravated circumstances/little likelihood services would effect reunification). Trial court terminated parental rights on Oct. 26, 2016; mother appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Edgar's Argument | ADHS's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conditions that led to initial removal were remedied so termination is improper | Edgar: She completed the case plan and had custody restored, showing remediation | ADHS: Although temporarily remedied, the same neglect/abuse reoccurred and conditions were not durably fixed | Court: Findings not clearly erroneous—conditions were not remedied long-term; ground proven by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether aggravated circumstances / "little likelihood" ground exists | Edgar: She showed progress and restoration; court’s aggravated-circumstances finding unsupported | ADHS: Multiple opportunities and services failed; recurrent neglect/abuse shows little likelihood services will reunify | Court: Aggravated-circumstances finding supported by evidence of repeated failures and removal after services |
| Whether TPR is in the children’s best interest (adoptability) | Edgar: Implied that reunification was viable and children bonded to mother | ADHS: Adoption likely; placement stable and children doing well in care | Court: ADHS witnesses (family-services worker and adoption specialist) credibly testified adoption likelihood was very high; adoptability factor satisfied |
| Whether continued contact with mother would cause potential harm | Edgar: Post-removal behavioral problems could be caused by removal itself; not necessarily mother’s conduct | ADHS: Mother’s drug use, housing instability, inadequate supervision, and past abuse/neglect foresee future harm | Court: Potential-harm finding upheld—past conduct, relapse, and instability justify forward-looking harm concern |
Key Cases Cited
- McFarland v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 91 Ark. App. 323, 210 S.W.3d 143 (Ark. Ct. App.) (best-interest inquiry is based on overall evidence, not rigid proof of each statutory factor)
- Pine v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 781, 379 S.W.3d 703 (Ark. Ct. App.) (potential-harm factor need not be proved with specificity; view is forward-looking)
- Albright v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 97 Ark. App. 277, 248 S.W.3d 498 (Ark. Ct. App.) (only one statutory ground required to support TPR)
- Threadgill v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2011 Ark. App. 642, 386 S.W.3d 543 (Ark. Ct. App.) (testimony from ADHS staff supporting adoptability suffices for adoptability factor)
- Cobbs v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 87 Ark. App. 188, 189 S.W.3d 487 (Ark. Ct. App.) (adoptability evidence need not meet clear-and-convincing standard; likelihood evidence is sufficient)
- Yarborough v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 96 Ark. App. 247, 240 S.W.3d 626 (Ark. Ct. App.) (affirming little-likelihood finding when parent had repeated opportunities but failed to correct parenting deficiencies)