In Re: Kaliyah S.
2015 Tenn. LEXIS 14
| Tenn. | 2015Background
- Kaliyah (b. 2008) and her sister Jaya were removed after Jaya suffered severe injuries; DCS filed dependency and neglect and later termination petitions.
- Father (Rontez L.) was established as Kaliyah’s biological father in separate paternity proceedings; he had intermittent incarceration, no custody, irregular visitation, and paid no child support.
- DCS originally prosecuted Mother and Josh for severe abuse; Father was later added to the termination petition on the ground of abandonment by conduct prior to incarceration showing wanton disregard.
- Juvenile Court terminated Father’s parental rights, finding the abandonment ground proved and concluding reasonable-efforts were not required as to Father because of aggravated circumstances.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding DCS must prove it made reasonable efforts to reunify (until a court finds aggravated circumstances). The Tennessee Supreme Court granted review.
- The Tennessee Supreme Court held that proof of reasonable efforts under Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-166 is not a precondition to termination under § 36-1-113; reasonable efforts are one factor in the best-interest analysis, not an independent element requiring clear-and-convincing proof.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DCS must prove it made reasonable efforts under § 37-1-166 as a precondition to terminating parental rights under § 36-1-113 | State: No; reasonable-efforts requirement belongs to dependency/juvenile proceedings and is not a required element of termination petitions | Father: Yes; courts must require proof of reasonable efforts unless and until a court finds aggravated circumstances | Held: No. § 36-1-113 does not make reasonable efforts a required element; reasonable efforts are a best-interest factor to be proved by a preponderance, not a precondition proved by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether the aggravated-circumstances exception relieves DCS of the duty to make reasonable efforts before a judicial finding | State: Aggravated-circumstances exception applies in dependency context; need not be litigated as precondition in termination proceedings | Father: DCS remains obligated to make reasonable efforts until a court makes an aggravated-circumstances determination | Held: The question of when DCS is relieved under § 37-1-166 is relevant to dependency proceedings; in termination proceedings the extent of efforts is only a best-interest factor and need not be established as a precondition |
| Appropriate burden of proof for DCS’s efforts in termination proceedings | State: If considered, reasonable efforts should be proven by preponderance within best-interest analysis | Father: If required, DCS must prove reasonable efforts by clear and convincing evidence as part of termination case | Held: Proof of reasonable efforts (when considered) is by preponderance as part of best-interest factual findings; termination still requires clear-and-convincing proof of the statutory ground and that termination is in the child’s best interest |
| Whether In re C.M.M. and progeny requiring proof of reasonable efforts as a precondition should control | State: In re C.M.M. incorrectly read the statutes; should be overruled to the extent it imposed a precondition | Father: Prior appellate precedents support DCS proving reasonable efforts in many termination cases | Held: Overruled In re C.M.M. and cases following it to the extent they required reasonable-efforts proof as a precondition to termination |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parental rights are fundamental liberty interests)
- M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (U.S. 1996) (gravity of terminating parental rights)
- In re Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d 586 (Tenn. 2010) (discussed reasonable-efforts role in termination proceedings)
- In re M.L.P., 281 S.W.3d 387 (Tenn. 2009) (termination doctrine and standards)
- In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (best-interest proof and burdens)
- In re Adoption of A.M.H., 215 S.W.3d 793 (Tenn. 2007) (statutory framework for termination and adoption)