In Re: A.N.H., Appeal of: B.M.H., father, 1095 WDA 2017

Child born April 2004; parents divorced and shared legal custody with Mother having primary physical custody per December 2015 agreed order.
Father’s visits moved to supervised settings (Safe Haven) after safety concerns; Mother obtained a one-year Protection From Abuse (PFA) order against Father in January 2016.
Father left Pennsylvania for North Carolina in May 2016 and did not provide contact information; he returned in December 2016 and was incarcerated on PFA violations until the March 28, 2017 hearing.
Mother filed a petition on December 7, 2016 seeking involuntary termination of Father’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1) so her husband (Stepfather) could adopt Child.
During the six months before the petition Father had almost no contact (one postcard, one Skype use), minimal financial support (three payments over 18 months), and did not participate in school, medical, or extracurricular matters.
Trial court terminated Father’s rights under § 2511(a)(1) and (b) on June 22, 2017; Superior Court affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	Father’s Argument	Held
Whether § 2511(a)(1) grounds exist (failure to perform parental duties/surrender for 6+ months)	Father evidenced a settled purpose to relinquish and failed to perform duties for at least six months prior to petition	Father disputed sufficiency of evidence to show abandonment/failure to perform duties	Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supported termination under § 2511(a)(1) due to lack of contact, support, and engagement
Whether termination meets the child’s best interests under § 2511(b)	Termination serves Child’s developmental, physical, emotional needs; Child improved (school, mood) since Father’s absence	Father argued insufficient evidence that termination was in Child’s best interest	Affirmed: trial court found terminating Father’s rights was in Child’s best interests based on Child’s wellbeing and adverse effect of Father’s contact

In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505 (Pa. Super. 2007) (standard of review for termination appeals)
In re T.F., 847 A.2d 738 (Pa. Super. 2004) (clear and convincing evidence standard defined)
In re Adoption of S.P., 47 A.3d 817 (Pa. 2012) (incarceration can be a determinative factor in termination analysis)
In re Adoption of M.E.P., 825 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Super. 2003) (requirements for § 2511(a)(1) showing)
In re N.M.B., 856 A.2d 847 (Pa. Super. 2004) (totality of circumstances and court must consider whole case history)
In re E.M., 620 A.2d 481 (Pa. 1993) (requirement to evaluate parent-child bond under § 2511(b))