2021 Ohio 955
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- FCCS filed neglect/dependency complaint Jan 4, 2017 after reports that mother was a heavy drug user, the home was unsanitary, and the children were often unsupervised; temporary custody was granted to FCCS and later converted to temporary court custody.
- Children: E.S. (b. 2005) and D.S. (b. 2008); both placed together in treatment foster care and remained in FCCS custody for 33 continuous months.
- Father was given a case plan (drug/alcohol assessment, random screens, parenting, mental-health assessment) but largely failed to comply: missed many call-ins/screens, completed no treatment, and maintained housing that caseworker and guardian ad litem found unsuitable.
- Guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody to FCCS; D.S. expressed a desire to reunify but also preference to stay with his foster family if reunification was not possible and did not want adoption.
- Trial on permanent custody: Nov. 4, 2019. Father contested only as to D.S.; trial court granted FCCS permanent custody and terminated parental rights; father appealed claiming the decision was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Father) | Defendant's Argument (FCCS / GAL) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether awarding permanent custody of D.S. to FCCS was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Father argued the court should not terminate his rights because removal was caused by mother, he attended visits and wanted reunification, and noncompliance should not outweigh his parental interest | FCCS and GAL argued father failed to complete case-plan requirements (many missed/positive drug screens, no treatment), housing was unsuitable, child had special needs, and the child had been in custody long enough to need a legally secure placement | Affirmed — appellate court found competent, credible evidence (clear and convincing) supported best-interest findings and permanent custody to FCCS was not against the manifest weight of the evidence |
| Whether statutory prerequisite for permanent custody (12+ months in agency custody) was met | Father did not dispute this point | FCCS relied on the custodial history showing 33 months in custody | Held — statutory requirement satisfied; court proceeded to best-interest analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (recognizes parents' constitutionally protected interest in raising their children)
- Karches v. Cincinnati, 38 Ohio St.3d 12 (1988) (appellate review must give interpretation consistent with verdict when evidence is susceptible to more than one construction)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (discusses essential parental rights and limits when child welfare requires state intervention)
- In re Cunningham, 59 Ohio St.2d 100 (1979) (parental rights are not absolute and may be terminated for child's welfare)