In re A.W., 2014 Ohio 3188

FCDJFS filed a 2012 complaint alleging A.W. was neglected and dependent; mother was in jail with depression, severe anxiety, and domestic violence charges against R.W., the biological father identified on A.W.'s birth certificate.
Temporary custody was assigned to FCDJFS; A.W. adjudicated neglected and dependent and remained in foster care under agency supervision, paternity for A.W. remained unknown.
Case plan required parenting, substance abuse/mental health treatment, random drug testing; by September 2012 the mother substantially completed the plan and custody was returned with protective supervision.
In October 2012, agency filed a new neglect/dependency complaint after concerns she failed to answer the door during a visit; mother appeared under the influence, admitted Xanax/Suboxone use contrary to doctor’s orders, and A.W. was placed back in temporary custody.
June 2013 the court again returned legal custody to the mother with protective supervision; a protection order barred R.W. from contact; agency expressed concerns about the mother’s relationships.
October 2013 welfare check revealed mother appeared intoxicated; A.W. removed again; mother failed to appear for agency appointment and delayed return, prompting renewed agency action for permanent custody.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Best interest standard for permanent custody	Appellant contends best interests not proven by clear and convincing evidence.	FCDJFS argues evidence shows long-term instability and need for legally secure placement.	Best interest proven by clear and convincing evidence; custody granted to agency.
Impact of bond with mother versus foster family	Mother argues bond requires continued custody; child bonded to mother.	Guardian ad litem and court found stronger bond with foster family and home.	Court properly found stronger bond with foster family; supports permanent custody.
Evidence of mother's intoxication and its effect on care	Mother asserts no credible evidence she was intoxicated.	Record shows repeated intoxication and drug mixing (Xanax with Suboxone) and failed sobriety tests.	Clear and convincing evidence of intoxication supports removal and custody decision.
Mother's ability to remedy and regain custody	Mother showed ability to complete case plan and regain custody previously.	Past recoveries were followed by relapse; pattern indicates inability to maintain stability.	Progress inadequate; no reasonable time frame to ensure sustained stability.
Financial stability and ability to provide care	Mother argues she can provide stability and support.	Record shows reliance on HUD housing, food stamps, and various support; insufficient to meet needs long-term.	Evidence demonstrates lack of financial stability necessary for legal permanence.

In re Mn S. (F), 2013-Ohio-3086 (12th Dist. Madison No. CA2013-02-004) (appellate review of manifest weight standard for custody)
In re M.Z., 2012-Ohio-3194 (9th Dist. Lorain No. 11 CA010104) (weight of the evidence standard in custody cases)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982) (due process standard for termination of parental rights; clear and convincing evidence required)
In re Rodgers, 138 Ohio App.3d 510 (12th Dist.2000) (appellate review of custody decisions; sufficiency of evidence)
In re S.D., 2014-Ohio-156 (12th Dist. Butler No. CA2013-08-138) (clear and convincing evidence standard; statutory best-interest factors)
In re A.M.L., 2013-Ohio-2277 (12th Dist. Butler No. CA2013-01-010) (reasonable time to remedy conditions; continued risk vs. safety)
In re L.M., 2011-Ohio-1585 (11th Dist. Ashtabula No. 2010-A-0058) (remedial time allowed; evaluation of parental ability)
In re G.F., 2014-Ohio-2580 (12th Dist. Butler No. CA2013-12-248) (two-part permanent custody test; best-interest plus safety factors)