In Re Brantley B., M2016-02547-COA-R3-PT

Child born 2012 to Mother (Lydia P.) and Father (Justin B.); Father obtained custody after 2012 dependency/neglect proceedings alleging Mother’s drug use and suicidality.
Father and Stepmother filed a petition (Mar. 31, 2016) to terminate Mother’s parental rights and for Stepmother’s adoption, alleging abandonment by failure to support and persistence of conditions. Trial occurred Oct. 25, 2016.
Trial court found two statutory grounds proved by clear and convincing evidence—abandonment by failure to support and persistence of conditions—and that termination was in child’s best interest; Mother appealed.
Record showed Mother paid no child support during the four months before the petition, had intermittent employment, significant drug use, multiple residences, some supervised visitation, and a prior juvenile-court order requiring direct support payments.
Court of Appeals affirmed termination for willful failure to support and best-interest finding, but reversed the persistence-of-conditions ground because no prior adjudication of dependency/neglect (required predicate) appeared in the record.

Issue	Petitioners' Argument	Mother’s Argument	Held
Whether Mother willfully abandoned the child by failing to pay support in the 4 months before the petition	Mother had a duty and ability to pay; she made no payments in the relevant period; any later payments were after the petition — constitutes willful failure to support	She lacked a stand-alone duty to pay directly (thought payments went through child-support office), had rent/financial obligations, and sometimes was unemployed	Affirmed: willful failure to support established by clear and convincing evidence
Whether persistence of conditions (36-1-113(g)(3)) was proved	Conditions that led to removal (Mother’s substance abuse, instability) persisted and were unlikely to be remedied, preventing safe return	Mother contested proof; record lacked an adjudication order establishing prior judicial finding of dependency/neglect required for this ground	Reversed: persistence-of-conditions not established because no prior adjudication of dependency/neglect in the record
Whether termination was in the child’s best interest	Combined statutory best-interest factors (Mother’s instability, drug history, limited parental role; Stepmother acting as parent; unpaid support) favor termination	Mother emphasized visitation and some relationship, argued factors didn’t prove termination was required	Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence termination served child’s best interest

Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (constitutional protection of parental rights)
Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (heightened burden of proof required to terminate parental rights)
In re Adoption of A.M.H., 215 S.W.3d 793 (Tenn. 2007) (statutory grounds required for termination)
Osborn v. Marr, 127 S.W.3d 737 (statutory authority required to terminate parental rights)
In re M.J.B., 140 S.W.3d 643 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (standard of review in termination appeals)
In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (definition of willful failure to support and token support analysis)
In re Valentine, 79 S.W.3d 539 (Tenn. 2002) (best-interest determination requires clear and convincing proof)
White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (fact-intensive best-interest inquiry)
In re Alysia S., 460 S.W.3d 536 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014) (definition of clear and convincing evidence in parental termination context)