In re E.H.
2016 Ohio 8170
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Child E.H. was conceived via sperm donation from biological father D.D.; parents intended T.H. and her husband S.H. to raise the child, with D.D. having no parental responsibilities.
- E.H. suffered extensive early medical issues and long hospital stays; clinicians later suspected unnecessary medical interventions potentially amounting to medical child abuse (Factitious Disorder by proxy).
- Ottawa County Dept. of Job & Family Services (OCDJFS) removed E.H. from the home after reports from Cleveland Clinic and placed her in foster care; juvenile court adjudicated E.H. dependent (not abused/neglected).
- Forensic psychological evaluations (Dr. Pittner) concluded T.H. met criteria for Factitious Disorder/Medical Child Abuse; guardian ad litem and child's attorney recommended custody to D.D.
- Trial court awarded legal custody of E.H. to biological father D.D.; T.H. appealed arguing trial-court error, insufficient agency reunification efforts, and constitutional violation to her parental rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (T.H.) | Defendant's Argument (OCDJFS / D.D.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by awarding legal custody to D.D. | T.H. completed case plan, child was adjudicated dependent only, Pittner’s report biased; custody award arbitrary | Trial court considered best-interest factors and found risk to child; relied on credible expert and GAL/attorney recommendations | Court: No abuse of discretion — custody to D.D. affirmed |
| Whether OCDJFS failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify | Agency biased, caseworker inattentive, services inadequate | OCDJFS provided case plans, supervised visitation, referrals, evaluations, and other supports; reasonable efforts were made | Court: Finding of reasonable efforts not against manifest weight of evidence |
| Whether award infringed T.H.’s constitutional right to parent | T.H. asserted fundamental right to raise her child outweighed state interest | State has compelling interest in child’s health and safety; dependency adjudication supports intervention | Court: No due-process violation; statutory framework and child safety justify custody transfer |
| Whether trial-court decision was against manifest weight of evidence | Evidence showed improvement and parental care; judge improperly credited Pittner | Record supports credibility findings, review of medical records, and fact pattern of symptoms resolving off T.H.’s care | Court: Decision not against manifest weight; factual findings upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (standard for abuse of discretion review)
- In re Weaver, 79 Ohio App.3d 59 (12th Dist. 1992) (definition of “reasonable effort” standard)