375 N.C. 784
N.C.2020Background
- DSS investigated in Jan 2017 after reports of improper care/substance use; mother was incarcerated on drug trafficking charges with projected release Dec 25, 2020.
- Children Katie and Anna were adjudicated neglected (Apr 24, 2017); custody to DSS and reunification plan adopted.
- Mother remained incarcerated during DSS involvement; she completed a “Mothering” class, anger-management, and grief-recovery classes but did not provide verification of mental-health or substance-abuse assessments and had not secured housing/employment well before release.
- Trial court (Oct 1, 2019) found grounds to terminate mother’s parental rights under N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(1), (2), and (6) and ended her parental rights to both children; mother appealed and obtained certiorari for one child.
- The Supreme Court reviewed whether the trial court’s factual findings were supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and whether statutory grounds were established, and reversed the termination orders.
Issues
| Issue | DSS (Plaintiff) Argument | Mother (Defendant) Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether neglect (N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(1)) existed (likelihood of future neglect) | Prior neglect adjudication plus mother’s incarceration and incomplete case-plan items show likely future neglect | Incarceration alone insufficient; she maintained contact, completed some classes, and record lacks proof she could/could not complete MH/SUD assessments while incarcerated | Reversed — insufficient evidence of likely future neglect; court disregarded unsupported findings about MH/SUD assessments |
| Whether mother failed to make reasonable progress (N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(2)) | Children were in placement >12 months and mother did not complete required assessments, parenting classes, or secure housing/employment | Incarceration limited ability to comply; she made some effort (Mothering, anger, grief classes); housing/employment expectations too remote (15 months before release) | Reversed — DSS failed to prove lack of reasonable progress; case-plan noncompliance not proved or not sufficiently connected to removal |
| Whether dependency existed (N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(6)) | Mother is incapable to care due to incarceration, supporting dependency | Trial court made no finding about existence (or lack) of an alternative caregiver; petitioner must prove both prongs | Reversed — trial court failed to make/find both required prongs (ability and alternative child-care arrangement) |
| Sufficiency of specific factual findings (parenting classes; MH/SUD assessments) | DSS: mother did not complete parenting or MH/SUD assessments; lack of verification supports findings | Mother: burden on DSS to prove noncompliance; some findings (ability to complete assessments) unsupported by evidence | Court: finding mother didn’t complete a recognized parenting class supported; but findings that she failed to obtain/verify MH/SUD assessments or had ability to do so while incarcerated were not supported and were struck/disregarded |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Z.A.M., 374 N.C. 88 (2020) (describing two-step adjudicatory/dispositional structure for TPR cases)
- In re A.U.D., 373 N.C. 3 (2019) (burden of proof and standard for adjudicatory stage)
- In re D.L.W., 368 N.C. 835 (2016) (appellate review of credibility and inferences by trial court)
- In re K.N., 373 N.C. 274 (2020) (incarceration is relevant but not dispositive for termination decisions)
- In re J.S., 374 N.C. 811 (2020) (nexus requirement between case-plan noncompliance and conditions of removal)
- In re B.O.A., 372 N.C. 372 (2019) (caution against terminating for failure to fully satisfy every case-plan element)
- In re Ballard, 311 N.C. 708 (1984) (requirement to consider changed circumstances and likelihood of future neglect)
- In re Montgomery, 311 N.C. 101 (1984) (standards for appellate review of findings in TPR matters)
- In re T.N.H., 372 N.C. 403 (2019) (unchallenged findings binding on appeal)