In re M.D.
2022 Ohio 1462
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2022Background
- M.D., removed from family care in Oct. 2019 (age 9) for severe behavioral issues, PTSD, and depression; placed in therapeutic foster care and later with foster mother Kelly Bass (Ms. Bass).
- S.D. (mother) has long-standing mental-health diagnoses, substance-abuse history, medication noncompliance, prior hospitalizations for suicidal ideation, and limited prior role as M.D.’s primary caregiver.
- Multiple kinship placements and relative caregivers failed due to M.D.’s behavioral problems; Ms. Bass provided the first sustained stability and improved school/behavioral functioning.
- GCJFS filed for permanent custody after M.D. had been in agency custody 12+ months of a consecutive 22-month period; the trial court granted permanent custody to GCJFS and terminated S.D.’s parental rights.
- S.D. contended on appeal that the grant of permanent custody was against the manifest weight of the evidence because a legally secure permanent placement could have been achieved without terminating her parental rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (S.D.) | Defendant's Argument (GCJFS / Trial Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the statutory 12-of-22-month custody prong (R.C. 2151.414(B)(1)(d)) was met | Impliedly disputed outcome but focused appeal on best-interest/placement rather than custodial time | M.D. was in GCJFS custody for 12+ of a consecutive 22-month period | Court found the statutory prong satisfied; proceeding to best-interest analysis |
| Whether the child’s best interest favors reunification or agency custody | S.D.: she substantially complied with the case plan and could provide or facilitate a legally secure placement without terminating rights | GCJFS: S.D.’s relapse, medication noncompliance, borderline intellectual functioning, and lack of parenting capacity make reunification unsafe; foster care provides needed stability | Trial court found best-interest factors (interaction, wishes, custodial history, need for legally secure placement) favored GCJFS; appellate court affirmed |
| Whether a legally secure permanent placement could be achieved without granting permanent custody to GCJFS | S.D.: a secure placement could be achieved without terminating parental rights | GCJFS: only permanent custody would ensure the stability and therapeutic environment M.D. needs given history of failed kinship placements and S.D.’s limitations | Court held a legally secure permanent placement could not be achieved without granting permanent custody to GCJFS |
| Whether the trial court’s decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence | S.D.: the evidence does not clearly and convincingly support termination and permanent custody | GCJFS: testimony, evaluations, and placements supply competent, credible evidence supporting termination | Appellate court: judgment supported by competent, credible evidence; appeal denied |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (Ohio 1985) (clarifies clear-and-convincing standard and protections required before terminating parental rights)
- C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 50 Ohio St.2d 279 (Ohio 1977) (legal standard that judgments supported by some competent, credible evidence will not be overturned on manifest-weight review)