In re J.R.
2018 Ohio 1474
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Child J.R., born July 2013, was removed at birth after testing positive for cocaine and marijuana; Franklin County Children Services (FCCS) obtained temporary custody in late 2013.
- Parents (appellant M.B. and father G.R.) were placed on case plans focused on substance-abuse treatment, random urine screens, stable housing, employment, and parenting classes; J.R. remained primarily in foster care.
- In February 2015 J.R. was placed on a brief leave with mother; mother relapsed during that leave and drug screens confirmed use.
- FCCS moved for permanent custody in August 2015 (alleging over 24 months in agency custody and parents’ failure to remedy conditions); father later moved for legal custody.
- At a custody trial in April–August 2017, evidence showed mother completed few of 347 required urine screens (44 completed and all positive), had intermittent employment and unstable housing (extended-stay hotel), and the guardian ad litem and caseworker recommended permanent custody to FCCS.
- The juvenile court granted FCCS permanent custody (finding R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(d) and (a) satisfied and that termination was in the child’s best interest); this decision was affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (FCCS) | Defendant's Argument (M.B.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court erred by terminating M.B.’s parental rights and awarding FCCS permanent custody | FCCS: Permanent custody proper because J.R. had been in agency custody >24 months; parents repeatedly failed to remedy substance-abuse and housing issues, making reunification not possible within a reasonable time; permanent custody is in child’s best interest. | M.B.: She substantially complied with the case plan (completed assessments and classes, secured employment and a prospective lease, claims sobriety) and thus the court should not terminate parental rights. | Court affirmed: evidence (including very limited and all-positive drug screens, relapse while child was on leave, unstable housing, no willing relatives) supports finding parents failed to remedy conditions; permanent custody is in child’s best interest. |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (recognition of parents’ fundamental right to raise their children tempered by child welfare interests)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (1978) (standard for appellate review of factual findings)
- Karches v. Cincinnati, 38 Ohio St.3d 12 (1988) (interpretation of evidence in favor of sustaining verdict)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (1954) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (1990) (parental rights as fundamental but not absolute)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (2007) (parental rights and child welfare balance)
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (2008) (discussion of clear-and-convincing standard in custody context)
- In re Brofford, 83 Ohio App.3d 869 (10th Dist. 1992) (permanent custody appellate review principles)