In re E.R.
2017 Ohio 7188
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- J.R., mother of E.R. (b. 2012) and S.L.J. (b. 2013), has a history of psychotic symptoms, hospitalizations, intermittent homelessness, incarceration, and marijuana use; both children were placed in FCCS custody soon after S.L.J.'s birth and remained in the same foster home for multiple years.
- The children were adjudicated dependent in 2013; E.R. was briefly placed with maternal relatives but returned to FCCS after being found unattended.
- FCCS filed motions for permanent custody in April 2015 after the children had been in agency custody for more than 12 months of a 22-month period.
- At the January 2017 hearing, testimony (caseworkers, psychologist, GALs) described J.R.’s ongoing psychotic symptoms, inconsistent medication compliance, continued marijuana use, unsafe and age-inappropriate supervised-visit parenting behaviors, and weak parent–child bonding; the foster family was described as bonded and a potentially adoptive placement.
- The trial court granted FCCS permanent custody, finding clear and convincing evidence that (1) the statutory 12-of-22-month custody ground applied and (2) awarding custody to FCCS was in the children’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in granting permanent custody to FCCS | J.R.: termination improper because agency did not make reasonable efforts and mother’s improved compliance/guardian ad litem testimony showed stability | FCCS: statutory custody ground satisfied (children in agency custody long enough) and evidence showed children’s best interests support permanent custody | Court: Affirmed — 12-of-22-month ground met; competent, credible evidence supported best-interest findings |
| Whether mental illness alone can justify removal/permanent custody | J.R.: mental illness, alone, is insufficient absent proof it adversely affects parenting; FCCS never allowed in-home assessment to show true functioning | FCCS: dependency adjudication already final; multiple witnesses tied J.R.’s mental-health symptoms to unsafe parenting during supervised visits | Court: Rejected relitigation of dependency; focused on best-interest inquiry and found testimony showed mental illness (with substance use) impaired parenting, supporting custody decision |
| Whether FCCS was barred from filing for permanent custody for failing to make reasonable reunification efforts | J.R.: agency failed to provide or enforce case-plan services and thus could not move for permanent custody under R.C. 2151.413(D)(3)(b) | FCCS: magistrate previously found reasonable efforts were made (Feb. 2015 findings); agency provided services and referrals throughout the case | Court: Found prior magistrate finding and evidence of services satisfied reasonable-efforts requirement; filing was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental custody is a fundamental liberty interest)
- In re D.A., 113 Ohio St.3d 88 (2007) (termination of parental rights is a last resort and parents must receive procedural and substantive protections)
- In re Hayes, 79 Ohio St.3d 46 (1997) (standards for parental-rights termination protections)
- In re Cunningham, 59 Ohio St.2d 100 (1979) (termination of parental rights guidance)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (dependency adjudication is a final appealable order)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (2007) (reasonable-efforts requirement must be shown prior to or at permanent-custody hearing; absence of prior proof does not bar agency from proving reasonable efforts at the hearing)
- Karches v. Cincinnati, 38 Ohio St.3d 12 (1988) (appellate courts must construe record in favor of sustaining trial-court judgments)
- In re H.F., 120 Ohio St.3d 499 (2008) (limitations on re-litigating dependency during permanent-custody proceedings)