Friedrich Dreher v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Child
639 S.W.3d 899
Ark. Ct. App.2022Background
- DHS removed three children from mother’s custody in October 2019; Friedrich Dreher was identified as the putative father of FD and listed on the birth certificate.
- The juvenile petition and early orders treated Dreher as a putative parent and ordered him to submit to DNA testing to establish paternity.
- Multiple review and permanency orders found Dreher noncompliant with the case plan, noted lack of contact since June 2020, and changed the goal to adoption.
- DHS filed a termination petition in December 2020 seeking to terminate Dreher’s rights to FD; the circuit court terminated his rights in a June 10, 2021 order on three statutory grounds.
- At the termination hearing Dreher’s counsel stated Dreher admitted paternity, but the circuit court never entered an express judicial finding that Dreher was FD’s parent.
- Both DHS and the attorney ad litem conceded error on appeal; the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded because the record lacked an express judicial finding establishing Dreher’s parental status before termination.
Issues
| Issue | Dreher’s Argument | DHS / Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS proved Dreher was FD’s "parent" before terminating rights | Termination cannot stand because DHS never proved or obtained a court finding that Dreher is FD’s legal parent | DHS proceeded treating Dreher as putative parent and relied on case history and counsel’s admission at hearing | Reversed: court must have an express judicial finding of parentage before terminating parental rights |
| Whether termination grounds could be sustained absent a judicial finding of parentage | Grounds require that the person be a parent; without that status, statutory elements are not met | DHS invoked statutory grounds (failure to remedy, failure to provide support/meaningful contact, subsequent factors) | Held that each statutory ground requires parental status; DHS failed to prove parentage, so grounds were not proven |
| Whether a litigant’s admission or DNA evidence suffices without a court finding | Admission or DNA evidence alone is insufficient; an express court finding is required | DHS relied on counsel admission and record references to putative-parent status | Court reiterated precedent: admissions or DNA do not substitute for an express judicial finding of parentage for termination purposes; remand required |
Key Cases Cited
- Earls v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 518 S.W.3d 81 (Ark. 2017) (supreme court: parental status must be judicially established for the statutory twelve-month analysis and before termination)
- Northcross v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 550 S.W.3d 919 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (court cannot terminate rights when it deliberately declines to find paternity)
- Burks v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 634 S.W.3d 527 (Ark. Ct. App. 2021) (remand required where legal status was made an issue but not resolved before termination)
- Tovias v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 575 S.W.3d 621 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019) (reversed where there was a finding of status but no evidentiary support)
- Terry v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 591 S.W.3d 824 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019) (a party’s self-identification or DNA probability does not replace an express judicial finding of parentage)