2025 Ohio 17
Ohio Ct. App.2025Background
- T.H. ("mother") has had ongoing involvement with Lucas County Children Services (LCCS) since 2010 due to mental health, substance abuse, and instability issues, losing custody of her four children at various times.
- J.S., the child at issue, was removed from the mother shortly after birth in 2017; legal custody was given to the paternal grandmother by 2019 as neither parent completed required services.
- In April 2023, J.S. was returned to LCCS when the grandmother could no longer care for her and no other relatives stepped forward; J.S. was found to have special needs (including fetal alcohol syndrome).
- The mother was given another opportunity for reunification through participation in case plan services but did not meaningfully engage in required mental health, substance abuse, housing, or parenting services.
- LCCS later moved for permanent custody, which the juvenile court granted, terminating both parents' rights; the mother appealed the trial court's decision, arguing she made substantial progress in case services.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody for LCCS was warranted | Mother claimed substantial progress in case plan services, including completing assessments and classes and reducing drug use. | LCCS argued mother failed to provide valid assessments, did not engage in required services, and failed to remedy conditions causing removal. | Termination of parental rights affirmed; sufficient evidence supported mother's failure to remedy conditions and address her issues. |
| Whether the best interest determination was supported by evidence | Mother argued J.S.'s wishes and mother-child relationship were not adequately assessed. | LCCS and GAL contended J.S. was not bonded to mother and expressed preference for foster family through conduct; visits were adverse for J.S. | Court found GAL's observations and testimony credible; best interests supported permanent custody to LCCS. |
| Adequacy of reasonable period to remedy conditions | Mother argued she deserved more time to complete services. | LCCS asserted mother had sufficient opportunity but consistently failed to address mental health and substance abuse. | Court held mother had a reasonable opportunity; further delay not required. |
| Sufficiency and weight of the evidence for termination | Mother contended the verdict was against manifest weight of the evidence. | LCCS argued clear and convincing evidence supported statutory factors for termination. | Court found evidence adequate for both sufficiency and manifest weight; affirmed judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re K.H., 119 Ohio St.3d 538 (Ohio 2008) (recognizing parents’ fundamental liberty interest in care, custody, and control of children)
- In re Hayes, 79 Ohio St.3d 46 (Ohio 1997) (requiring procedural and substantive protections in termination proceedings)
- In re Z.C., 169 Ohio St.3d 409 (Ohio 2023) (clarifying sufficiency and manifest weight as proper appellate review standards in custody cases)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (Ohio 1954) (defining clear and convincing evidence standard for termination of parental rights)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (Ohio 2007) (discussing the state’s role and burden in permanent custody cases)