In re A.M.L.
2013 Ohio 2277
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Mother was 16 at A.M.L.'s birth; removal occurred after Mother, Grandmother, and Great Grandmother appeared intoxicated in school and at home (Mar. 2011).
- A.M.L. has resided with a foster family since removal; agency filed for permanent custody in Mar. 2012; case plan aimed at reunification.
- Mother repeatedly tested positive for drugs, faced multiple arrests, and failed to complete case-plan requirements (housing, income, parenting program).
- Mother completed a substance-abuse assessment but refused or did not complete recommended treatment; she was not employed during the 18 months prior to the permanent custody hearing.
- Court found A.M.L. had been in agency custody for 12+ months of a 22-month period by the time the motion was filed; GAL recommended permanent custody.
- Court ultimately granted permanent custody to the Agency, concluding it was in A.M.L.'s best interest and Mother failed to remedy conditions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody to the Agency was in A.M.L.'s best interest. | Mother asserts best interests favor custodial reunification. | Agency argues bonding is outweighed by need for secure placement and mother’s lack of progress. | Yes; best interest supported by bonding with foster family and lack of Mother progress. |
| Whether statutory criteria for permanent custody were met (12+ months in custody). | Mother does not dispute duration; argues for potential future improvement. | Agency satisfied 12/22-month requirement. | Yes; second prong satisfied by 12+ months in agency custody. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re E.P., 2011-Ohio-6225 (Ohio 2011) (applies two-prong test for permanent custody; best interest and 12/22-month custody requirement)
- In re Starkey, 2002-Ohio-6892 (Ohio 2002) (reaffirms standard of review and sufficiency of evidence)
- In re S.S., 2011-Ohio-5697 (Ohio 2011) (upholds permanent custody despite lack of perfect parent progress)
- In re J.C., 2007-Ohio-3783 (Ohio 2007) (permits considering reasonable period to remedy conditions; not indefinite)
- In re L.M., 2011-Ohio-1585 (Ohio 2011) (reasonable time to address issues; drug treatment not guaranteed success)