In re C.E.
2021 Ohio 3916
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background:
- Mother had prior child-welfare involvement: an infant died in Illinois (2000) and Iowa courts terminated her parental rights to three children (2008).
- C.E. (born July 2016) suffered a catastrophic brain injury at three months old while in mother’s care; he is ventilator-dependent, nonambulatory, tube-fed, and requires extensive specialty care.
- HCJFS obtained interim/temporary custody after disputes about medical decisionmaking, mother’s refusal of some recommended treatment, and mother’s failure to complete required medical training or relocate so home health care could be safely provided.
- The juvenile court and magistrate issued differing custody orders (a clerical error led to an earlier mistaken permanent-custody entry), this court remanded to correct that error, and HCJFS later renewed its motion for permanent custody.
- At trial HCJFS presented evidence mother: did not complete training, missed visits for >90 days, refused services and relocation, and had prior involuntary terminations of parental rights; the juvenile court awarded permanent custody of C.E. to HCJFS and the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 2151.414(B) and (D) (permanent-custody framework) are unconstitutional as applied | Mother argued the statutory provisions violated her due-process rights | State/HCJFS argued the constitutional challenge was waived because it was not raised in the trial court; court should decline review | Court declined to consider the constitutional attack due to waiver and overruled the assignment of error |
| Whether permanent custody was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the manifest weight | Mother argued the best-interest finding was unsupported and against the manifest weight of the evidence | HCJFS argued clear-and-convincing evidence supported permanent custody based on child’s needs, mother’s inability to provide required medical care, custodial history, abandonment (90+ days no contact), and prior terminations | Court held the juvenile court’s best-interest finding was supported by clear and convincing evidence and was not against the manifest weight; affirmed permanent custody |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Awan, 22 Ohio St.3d 120, 489 N.E.2d 277 (Ohio 1986) (failure to raise a constitutional claim in the trial court waives the issue on appeal)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538, 895 N.E.2d 809 (Ohio 2008) (defines the clear-and-convincing evidence standard in juvenile custody proceedings)