In re L.L., Juvenile, 2016-191

Mother has longstanding PTSD/anxiety from childhood abuse and a history of domestic violence; previously lost custody of two older children (parental rights relinquished/terminated in 2011 and 2015) due in part to mental-health and parenting concerns.
DCF received a report in Feb 2016 that mother was pregnant; mother initially gave a false report of miscarriage; L.L. was born March 2016.
The State filed a CHINS petition the day after L.L.’s birth; parents contested and a contested hearing was held in family court.
The family court found mother engaged in therapy and had stable housing but lacked insight into why her older children were removed, had not benefited from prior extended services, and failed to engage successfully in family-time coaching or demonstrate improved parenting skills.
Based on current evidence and the prior child-welfare history, the court adjudicated L.L. a child in need of care or supervision (CHINS); parents appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence showed L.L. was "without proper parental care" at filing	Mother argued prior events and mental-health evidence were not current and did not show she presently lacked ability to care for L.L.	State argued current risk could be shown by recent history, mother’s lack of insight, failed engagement in services, and treatment of siblings.	Court upheld CHINS: current evidence (including prior sibling cases and mother’s limited progress) supported finding of lack of proper parental care.

In re D.D., 194 Vt. 508 (2013) (standard of review on CHINS appeals: factual findings upheld unless clearly erroneous)
In re L.M., 195 Vt. 637 (2014) (State need not show actual harm; risk of harm suffices for CHINS)
In re J.J.P., 168 Vt. 143 (1998) (court may rely on treatment of siblings to show pattern of neglect/abuse)
In re M.L., 187 Vt. 291 (2010) (trial court as factfinder weighs credibility and the evidence of parental progress)