Gyalog v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2015 Ark. App. 302
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- DHS filed emergency custody/dependency-neglect petitions for two children in June 2013 based on the mother’s drug use and unsafe home; father Khosrow Gyalog was incarcerated.
- Children adjudicated dependent-neglected in August 2013; court ordered DHS to facilitate visitation with Gyalog and to perform a home study on his sister, Jeanette Rayburn, in California.
- Rayburn’s home-study was delayed and she expressed hesitancy about placement; DHS caseworkers testified she was not fully cooperative in completing paperwork.
- Children were placed with foster parents, developed strong bonds, showed improvement, and foster parents sought to adopt; therapist recommended permanency/adoption.
- Trial court changed goal from reunification to termination/adoption and later terminated parental rights, finding parents had not remedied conditions, relatives were not viable placements, children needed permanency, and foster parents were willing to adopt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appeal preserved challenge to permanency-planning order | Gyalog preserved the issue by designating the permanency-planning transcript and order in his notice of appeal. | DHS implied prior cases show failure to designate waives the issue, but Gyalog did list the hearing and order. | Preserved. Notice of appeal sufficiently designated the permanency-planning hearing and order. |
| Whether changing the goal to termination/adoption was in children’s best interest | Gyalog argued placement with sister Rayburn was possible and home study was incomplete, so goal change was premature. | DHS argued Rayburn was equivocal/unavailable, delays were partly her fault, children were bonded to foster parents, and adoption served permanency. | Court affirmed goal change; finding that termination/adoption was in children’s best interest was not clearly erroneous. |
| Whether termination of parental rights was in children’s best interest | Gyalog argued children could be placed with Rayburn until his release and termination was unnecessary. | DHS showed lengthy incarceration, Rayburn’s equivocation, children’s thriving foster placement, therapist’s support for adoption. | Termination affirmed; court’s best-interest findings were supported by evidence and not clearly erroneous. |
| Whether DHS failed to make reasonable efforts toward reunification | Gyalog implied inadequate effort by DHS (delays in home study, denial of visitation). | DHS presented evidence of reasonable efforts, efforts to complete home study, and services offered; some delays caused by relatives. | Court found DHS made reasonable efforts; appellate deference to trial court credibility determinations upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Contreras v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2014 Ark. 51 (discussing standard of review and deference to trial-court credibility findings)
- Lamontagne v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. 190 (same)
- Davis v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 469 (court may set termination/adoption as goal even with a relative available)
- Velazquez v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 2011 Ark. App. 168 (notice-of-appeal must designate permanency-planning order to preserve challenges to it)
- Bryant v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 2011 Ark. App. 390 (failure to include transcript of permanency hearing in record waives related arguments)
- Thornton v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 2012 Ark. App. 670 (issues on reunification waived if not appealed or designated)
- Aka v. Jefferson Hosp. Ass’n, Inc., 69 Ark. App. 395, 13 S.W.3d 224 (appeal of final judgment brings up intermediate orders when appropriate)