In Re Daniel D.
9 A.3d 651
R.I.2010Background
- Diaz, father of Daniel, Jose and Emmanuel (ages 15, 13, 12), has mental retardation and speaks only Spanish.
- DCYF first became involved in Aug 2002 after reports of mother’s abuse and drug use; children were placed in DCYF custody.
- Children relocated to Puerto Rico with Diaz in 2004; case closed after favorable home study; they returned to Rhode Island by Feb 9, 2006.
- Feb 14, 2006: DCYF petition for dependency, neglect, and abuse asserting Diaz’s physical abuse; children again placed in DCYF custody.
- Sept 28, 2007: DCYF filed three petitions to terminate Diaz’s parental rights; Oct 2008 five-day trial.
- Trial court (Apr 8, 2009) ordered termination on grounds of abandonment after finding Diaz had little contact from Feb 2006 to Dec 2007 and had failed to maintain contact via his sister.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether abandonment was proven by clear and convincing evidence | Diaz contends abandonment was rebutted by efforts to reunify and contact attempts. | DCYF argues Diaz failed to maintain substantial contact for six months as required, establishing abandonment. | Abandonment proven; termination affirmed. |
| Whether termination was in the best interests of the children | Diaz argues severing ties is not in the children's best interests. | DCYF asserts safety, stability, and permanency factors support termination and adoption. | Termination in best interests; adoption and permanency appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Brooklyn M., 933 A.2d 1113 (R.I. 2007) (great weight given to Family Court findings on abuse and neglect)
- In re Angelina T., 996 A.2d 623 (R.I. 2010) (appellate deferential standard to trial court credibility findings)
- In re Natalya C., 946 A.2d 198 (R.I. 2008) (deference to trial court on abandonment and best interests)
- In re Serenity K., 891 A.2d 881 (R.I. 2006) (parental obligation to maintain contact with child in DCYF care)
- In re Michael T., 796 A.2d 473 (R.I. 2002) (parent’s duty to maintain contact and plan for the child’s future)
- In re Ariel N., 892 A.2d 80 (R.I. 2006) (best interests standard and termination to ensure permanency)
- In re Alvia K., 909 A.2d 498 (R.I. 2006) (child welfare priority of permanency over prolonged disruption)
- In re Douglas F., 840 A.2d 1089 (R.I. 2003) (principles favoring timely permanency for children)
- In re David L., 877 A.2d 667 (R.I. 2005) (considerations in termination decisions and parental rights)
- In re Kristen B., 558 A.2d 200 (R.I. 1989) (early articulations of best interests and permanency doctrine)
- In re Alexis L., 972 A.2d 159 (R.I. 2009) (appellate review of findings in abuse/abandonment cases)