Fraser v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
557 S.W.3d 886
Ark. Ct. App.2018Background
- DHS removed A.F. (born 2009) and her siblings from mother Whitney Reynolds in November 2015 after a history of substantiated neglect and drug exposure; Fraser was identified as A.F.’s father and was largely incarcerated during the case.
- Fraser was serving a twenty-year sentence; he was on parole briefly in 2016 but returned to custody and expected parole in early 2018. He had multiple disciplinary infractions while incarcerated.
- DHS filed a petition to terminate Fraser’s parental rights in August 2017 alleging multiple statutory grounds (including sentenced-in-a-criminal-proceeding, abandonment, failure to remedy, and willful failure to support) and that termination was in A.F.’s best interest.
- At the termination hearing, DHS and CASA witnesses testified Fraser had virtually no relationship or bond with A.F., no visitation, and that A.F. was thriving in a stable, adoptive-ready foster home. DHS had not offered prison-specific services but asserted it stood ready to do so.
- Fraser testified he had attempted limited contact (letters, a few calls while on parole), denied intent to abandon A.F., and asserted DHS’s failure to provide services contributed to the lack of a bond.
- The circuit court terminated Fraser’s parental rights (order entered December 5, 2017); Fraser appealed, challenging statutory grounds and best-interest finding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Fraser) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentenced-in-a-criminal-proceeding ground applies | Sentence start date not in record; court erred to rely on prison sentence length | Twenty-year sentence covers a substantial portion of child’s life; court may consider sentence length | Court affirmed: twenty-year sentence (imposed ~2011) constitutes a substantial period of A.F.’s life, ground proved |
| Whether DHS failed to provide services, undermining best-interest finding | DHS’s failure to provide prison visitation/services caused lack of bond; cannot penalize incarcerated parent for DHS inaction | Reasonable-efforts inquiry not required in §9-27-341(b)(3) best-interest analysis; court may consider adoptability and potential harm | Court rejected Fraser’s claim; best-interest finding stands despite limited services evidence |
| Whether returning child would cause potential harm | Fraser: no demonstrated forward-looking harm; asserts contact attempts | DHS: no bond, long incarceration, disciplinary issues, stable foster placement; returning would harm child | Court held potential-harm finding not clearly erroneous given lack of bond, incarceration, and child’s thriving placement |
| Whether termination supported by statutory grounds generally | Fraser challenged multiple grounds (failure to remedy, abandonment, willful failure to support, aggravated circumstances) | DHS pled multiple grounds; only one statutory ground is required to terminate | Court affirmed termination; relied on (and the appellate court found) sentenced-in-a-criminal-proceeding ground sufficient (need not address all alternatives) |
Key Cases Cited
- Pine v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 379 S.W.3d 703 (standards for termination review; best-interest and statutory-ground requirements)
- Dinkins v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 40 S.W.3d 286 (deference to trial court credibility findings in child-placement matters)
- Brumley v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 455 S.W.3d 347 (appellate court may affirm termination on a ground alleged in petition even if trial order omitted that ground)
- Moore v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 969 S.W.2d 186 (prior affirmation of termination where long prison sentence covered a substantial portion of child’s life)
- Chaffin v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 471 S.W.3d 251 (best-interest factors: adoptability and potential harm; forward-looking potential-harm analysis)
- Edwards v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 480 S.W.3d 215 (party challenging a ground cannot demand DHS put sentencing order into evidence; appellate treatment of sentencing evidence)