In re Guardianship of K.R., 923 N.W.2d 435

Heather R., mother of K.R. (born 2007), stipulated to appointment of her parents Mark and Cynthia R. as K.R.’s coguardians in 2014 under terms requiring evaluations, classes, and progressive visitation.
In May 2015 K.R. disclosed physical and sexual abuse that occurred while in Heather’s care; Heather was later criminally convicted (Class IIIA child abuse) for failing to protect K.R. and sentenced to 18 months’ probation.
Visits were suspended after disclosure; K.R. underwent therapy and exhibited ongoing trauma symptoms (nightmares, incontinence, self-harm, fear of being alone) and expressed that Heather had disbelieved/blamed her.
Heather sought termination of the guardianship and reinstatement of visitation in April 2017; trial occurred in May–June 2017 where therapist and grandparents opposed reunification, and Heather presented updated psychological evaluations and treatment history.
The county court denied termination and visitation, stating it would consider reinstatement/therapy/termination only if recommended by K.R.’s therapist; Heather appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the guardianship should be terminated	Heather: appellees failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that she is unfit or forfeited custody	Appellees: Heather’s conviction and K.R.’s ongoing trauma show termination would harm K.R.; parental preference is negated by best interests	Court affirmed: best interests of child outweigh parental preference given Heather’s conviction, K.R.’s trauma, and therapist’s opposition
Whether visitation should be reinstated	Heather: court should restore visitation rights	Appellees/therapist: therapist recommended no visitation until progress; visitation would harm K.R. now	Court affirmed denial of visitation; trial evidence supported refusal given therapist’s assessment and K.R.’s condition
Whether the court improperly delegated decision-making to therapist	Heather: court unlawfully delegated authority by conditioning future actions on therapist recommendation	Appellees: court retained decision-making authority and merely required therapeutic recommendation before acting	Court held no improper delegation: court retained authority and would consider therapist recommendations as evidence before ruling

In re Guardianship of D.J., 268 Neb. 239 (rebuttable parental preference presumption; burden on guardian to prove parent unfit by clear and convincing evidence)
In re Guardianship of Elizabeth H., 17 Neb. App. 752 (standard of appellate review in probate/guardianship matters)
Windham v. Griffin, 295 Neb. 279 (parental preference is a preference and can be overcome when best interests lie elsewhere)
In re Interest of Amber G., et al., 250 Neb. 973 (discusses limitations on depriving parental custody absent unfitness)
In re Interest of Lilly S. & Vincent S., 298 Neb. 306 (cited for distinction on other grounds)
Gorman v. Gorman, 400 So. 2d 75 (example where a child’s best interests defeated the biological parent’s preference)