In Re: Adoption of A.C. a minor, Appeal of: E.A.B.
In Re: Adoption of A.C. a minor, Appeal of: E.A.B. No. 246 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Aug 7, 2017Background
- Child A.C. III (b. March 2012) was placed in foster care after neglect and severe tooth decay; foster parents became pre-adoptive placement in May 2014 following adjudication of dependency.
- At birth, the child tested positive for opiates; Mother (recovering heroin addict) tested positive for methadone; Mother later pled guilty to endangering children related to sexual abuse of older siblings and received court-ordered sexual offender evaluation/treatment.
- Mother’s participation in services was inconsistent: sporadic mental-health counseling attendance, abandonment of treatment in March 2016, and inconsistent supervised visitation (attended 14 of 30 visits during one period). She ignored therapist and agency directives during visits and last visited on December 30, 2015.
- CYS filed a petition (Nov. 23, 2015) to involuntarily terminate Mother’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1), (2), (5), (8) and (b). The Orphans’ Court granted termination on Jan. 17, 2017.
- The court’s opinion primarily analyzed termination under § 2511(a)(1) (failure to perform parental duties/settled purpose of relinquishment) and (b) (best interests/needs and welfare). Mother appealed, arguing the agency frustrated her reunification efforts; she did not contest the court’s needs-and-welfare findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (CYS/Orphans’ Ct.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination of Mother’s parental rights was supported by clear and convincing evidence under § 2511(a)(1) and (b) | Mother contends the agency and therapists frustrated her efforts to see and parent the child, so CYS failed to prove she evidenced a settled purpose to relinquish or refused parental duties | Mother’s inconsistent treatment/visitation, failure to follow parenting recommendations, and the child’s adverse reactions show failure to perform parental duties and lack of bond; termination serves child’s needs and welfare | Affirmed: Orphans’ Court properly terminated under § 2511(a)(1) and (b); appellate court adopts trial court opinion and finds no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- In re D.C.D., 105 A.3d 662 (Pa. 2014) (appellate-review standard for termination decisions; defer to trial court fact/credibility findings)
- In re A.S., 11 A.3d 473 (Pa. Super. 2010) (§ 2511(a)(1) may be satisfied by settled purpose to relinquish or failure to perform parental duties; consider entire case history)
- In re Adoption of L.J.B., 18 A.3d 1098 (Pa. 2011) (burden on petitioner to prove statutory grounds by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re K.Z.S., 946 A.2d 753 (Pa. Super. 2008) (court should not apply six-month statutory period mechanically; consider whole record)
- In re D.J.S., 737 A.2d 283 (Pa. Super. 1999) (parental rights may be terminated under § 2511(a)(1) for either relinquishment or failure to perform duties)
- In re Adoption of S.P., 47 A.3d 817 (Pa. 2012) (parental duty includes affirmative obligations to love, protect, support, and maintain communication; evaluate use of available resources)
- In re Z.S.W., 946 A.2d 726 (Pa. Super. 2008) (after finding under § 2511(a)(1), court must consider parent’s explanation, post-abandonment contact, and § 2511(b) effect on child)