2019 Ohio 4127
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background:
- Two daughters (Y.S., b.2009; A.S., b.2010) had prior agency involvement and were removed from Mother in Jan 2016 after findings of abuse/neglect; BCCS placed them in foster care where they remained bonded to the same foster family.
- Parents agreed at adjudication that the children were dependent (and Y.S. abused); a reunification case plan was ordered for both parents with services for parenting, SAMI assessments, counseling, supervised visitation, and drug screens.
- Mother completed many services and briefly regained temporary custody in Jan 2018, but BCCS removed the children again in June 2018 due to supervisory lapses, untreated medical/mental-health needs, home cleanliness/infestation, and inappropriate babysitters.
- Father participated in services and had periods of negative drug screens, but later had repeated positive cocaine tests, inconsistent housing, limited prior involvement with the children, and unresolved domestic-violence history.
- The foster family was willing to adopt all four siblings; BCCS moved for permanent custody in June 2018, and after a four-day hearing the juvenile court granted permanent custody to BCCS by clear and convincing evidence.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody is in the children’s best interests | Mother/Father: They maintained contact, completed services, and can provide care | BCCS: Parents failed to remedy the conditions that led to removal; children need permanency | Court: Best-interest factors support granting permanent custody to BCCS |
| Whether the evidence was insufficient or against the manifest weight | Parents: Progress in case plans shows placement with them is feasible | BCCS: Continued safety/health/supervision concerns, Father’s relapse, and unstable housing persist | Court: Credible evidence supports factfinder; judgment not against manifest weight |
| Whether statutory basis for permanent custody exists (second prong) | Parents: (did not dispute) | BCCS: Children were in agency temporary custody >12 months of a consecutive 22-month period | Court: Statutory prong satisfied; only one of the enumerated findings required |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982) (state must prove by clear and convincing evidence before terminating parental rights)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (standard for manifest-weight review and deference to the factfinder)