In Re Kamora W.
132 Conn. App. 179
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2011Background
- Kamora, born prematurely with medical complexities, has lived in foster care since 2008 under the Department of Children and Families.
- Respondent father had supervised visits with Kamora and was subject to specific steps aimed at reunification, including sobriety, parenting training, and avoiding domestic violence.
- Kamora’s mother has a long history of substance abuse and mental health issues; the mother and respondent maintained an ongoing relationship despite concerns about stability.
- Over time, respondent’s contact with Kamora declined, and Kamora bonded with her foster family who are not the respondents.
- Evidence showed cocaine use and alcohol issues by the respondent, coupled with refusal of ongoing substance abuse treatment, undermining rehabilitation.
- The trial court terminated both Kamora’s and the respondent’s parental rights, finding the respondent failed to achieve a sufficient degree of personal rehabilitation under § 17a-112(j)(3)(B)(ii).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was an ongoing relationship with Kamora's mother justifying concern. | Kamora's mother had ongoing contact and thus impaired rehabilitation. | There was no sustained, disqualifying ongoing relationship that would affect reunification. | Yes; evidence supported an ongoing relationship impacting rehabilitation. |
| Whether the respondent suffered from a substance abuse problem | Respondent had a history of cocaine use and other substance issues affecting care. | Respondent completed a rehab program; recent hair tests were negative and no ongoing problem shown. | Yes; evidence supported an inadequately addressed substance abuse problem. |
| Whether the respondent lacked a reliable family support system for Kamora care | Family members offered could assist, suggesting support was available. | No reliable caregiver could be relied upon; proposed supports were not stable or certain. | Yes; evidence showed absence of a dependable support system. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Jennifer W., 75 Conn.App. 485, 816 A.2d 697 (Conn. App. 2003) (clear and convincing standard; rehabilitation assessment)
- In re Ashley E., 62 Conn.App. 307, 771 A.2d 160 (Conn. App. 2001) (trial court credibility given deference)
- In re Chevol G., 125 Conn.App. 618, 9 A.3d 413 (Conn. App. 2010) (rehabilitation judged by needs of child)
- In re Eden F., 250 Conn. 674, 741 A.2d 873 (Conn. 1999) (foreseeability of rehabilitation within reasonable time)
- In re Alejandro L., 91 Conn.App. 248, 881 A.2d 450 (Conn. App. 2005) (relationship with non-stable partner as rehabilitation factor)
- In re Sheila J., 62 Conn.App. 470, 771 A.2d 244 (Conn. App. 2001) (considerations of rehabilitation and child’s needs)
- In re Samantha C., 268 Conn. 614, 847 A.2d 883 (Conn. 2004) (weight given to trial court's credibility determinations)