In re K.G., 2021 Ohio 2154

Child K.G. (born Sept. 16, 2013) was removed after a Dec. 2018 shelter-care hearing; Mother tested positive for marijuana and benzodiazepines shortly thereafter.
CCCS filed a complaint (Dec. 27, 2018) alleging neglect based on an incident involving K.G.'s younger sibling and concerns about Mother's stability and care.
On Jan. 29, 2019, the juvenile court placed K.G. in the temporary custody of the paternal great-aunt (Aunt); K.G. was adjudicated neglected on Feb. 19, 2019.
Mother’s case plan required parenting and domestic-violence classes, stable housing/income, and drug/mental-health treatment; Mother completed some services but failed to show stable employment or completed mental-health treatment.
CCCS moved (July 2020) for legal custody to be awarded to Aunt, citing over 17 months of continuous placement, Aunt’s approved home study, and K.G.’s stability and expressed wish to remain with Aunt.
After a Sept. 21, 2020 hearing (testimony from the caseworker, guardian ad litem, and Aunt), the juvenile court granted legal custody to Aunt (Oct. 27, 2020); Mother appealed claiming abuse of discretion.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	CCCS/Aunt’s Argument	Held
Whether the juvenile court abused its discretion in awarding legal custody of K.G. to Aunt	Court ignored Mother’s pandemic-era progress and improvements; award deprived Mother of reunification opportunity	Award was in child’s best interest: K.G. had a stable, long-term placement with Aunt, strong bond, and Mother lacked stable income and proof of completed mental-health treatment	No abuse of discretion; legal custody to Aunt affirmed as being in child’s best interest under a preponderance standard
Whether Mother’s asserted case-plan progress required reunification	Completion/progress on the case plan (or partial progress) should weigh in favor of returning K.G. to Mother	Case-plan completion is not dispositive; the key is whether the conditions that caused removal were substantially remedied and whether reunification serves the child’s best interest	Court correctly relied on best-interest factors rather than treating case-plan completion as dispositive

Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (defines abuse-of-discretion standard: more than error of law or judgment)
In re C.R., 108 Ohio St.3d 369 (2006) (distinguishes legal custody from permanent custody; legal custody does not terminate parental rights)