In re Interest of Brooklyn T. & Charlotte T.
26 Neb. Ct. App. 669
Neb. Ct. App.2018Background
- Mother Amanda T. is parent to Brooklyn (b. Sept. 2016) and Charlotte (b. Feb. 2018); father's rights were terminated earlier and are not at issue.
- Brooklyn was removed in July 2017 after Amanda's drug use; an amended petition alleged neglect and failure to provide parental care; Amanda admitted allegations regarding Brooklyn in Oct. 2017 and was ordered to complete services.
- Amanda failed to engage successfully in court-ordered services (chemical/psych evaluations, family support, supervised visitation), maintain stable housing, or lawful income.
- When Charlotte was born in Feb. 2018, Amanda tested positive for amphetamine; the State filed for termination of parental rights to both children.
- At the termination hearing Amanda admitted the statutory grounds under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(2) and that termination was in the children’s best interests; the court found a factual basis and terminated Amanda’s parental rights to both children.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Amanda) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether State established statutory grounds under § 43-292(2) for termination | Amanda repeatedly and substantially neglected children by continuing drug use, failing services, unstable housing/income | Amanda challenged sufficiency of proof for best interests on appeal (did not contest factual basis for statutory grounds) | Court found sufficient factual basis for § 43-292(2); Amanda admitted allegations, so independent clear-and-convincing proof not required |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interests | Amanda’s longstanding DHHS history, disengagement from services, drug use (including methamphetamine during pregnancy), failure to complete reunification tasks made termination necessary for children’s welfare | Amanda argued State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination served children’s best interests | Court held State provided sufficient factual basis; Amanda’s admissions relieved State of proving best interests by clear-and-convincing evidence; termination affirmed |
| Adequacy of factual basis for admissions under § 43-279.01(3) | Exhibit and affidavit (DHHS permanency specialist) showed history of DHHS intakes, prior relinquishment, ongoing drug use, failure to engage in services | Amanda did not assign error to factual basis but contested best-interests proof | Court performed de novo review and found the factual basis sufficient to support admissions and termination |
| Whether children should remain in foster care awaiting parental rehabilitation | State: children should not be delayed indefinitely; parent failed to rehabilitate within reasonable time | Amanda: argued for preserving parent-child relationship (best interests) | Court agreed with State: children’s interests require timely permanency; termination warranted where parent unlikely to rehabilitate in reasonable time |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Interest of Noah B., 295 Neb. 764 (appellate review of juvenile cases is de novo)
- In re Interest of Hope L. et al., 278 Neb. 869 (§ 43-292 requires clear and convincing proof of statutory grounds and best interests)
- In re Interest of Zanaya W. et al., 291 Neb. 20 (parental admissions remove State's burden to prove allegations by clear and convincing evidence; court must ascertain factual basis)
- In re Interest of Walter W., 274 Neb. 859 (exposure to drugs in home is detrimental to children’s best interests)
- In re Interest of Giavonna G., 23 Neb. App. 853 (children should not be left in foster care awaiting uncertain parental maturity)