2013 Ohio 1063
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- In Fayette County, Ohio, C.G. (mother) appealed a juvenile court order granting permanent custody of M.H. to Fayette County Children Services.
- Agency filed a abuse/dependent complaint in 2010; M.H. initially adjudicated abused and dependent and remained with protective supervision.
- A second 2010 complaint alleged new sexual-abuse incidents; M.H. again adjudicated abused and dependent and placed in agency custody.
- M.H. was placed in foster care, diagnosed with PTSD, and hospitalized for behavior issues; long-term placement options were limited.
- In 2012 the agency sought permanent custody; multiple relative placements failed; current therapeutic foster home is the best safe placement; guardian ad litem supported permanent custody.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best interests: can child be placed with a parent within reasonable time | M.H. could be placed with mother with proper services | Agency—placement with either parent is not feasible | Best-interest finding supported; cannot be placed with either parent within reasonable time |
| Wishes of the child and need for independent counsel | Child's wishes not determined; potential GAL-attorney conflict | GAL recommendation relied upon; no conflict shown | Court's failure to interview child or independently assess wishes not reversible error; no conflict shown; permanent custody affirmed |
| Whether the 12 of 22 months custody requirement negates need to show cannot be placed | Argument that 12/22 months rule applies | Judge found 12/22 months applicable; still in best interest analysis | Court correctly applied statutory framework; termination proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (Supreme Court 1982) (clear and convincing standard governs parental termination)
- In re Starkey, 150 Ohio App.3d 612 (Ohio App. 7th Dist. 2002) (review is limited to credibility of evidence for best-interest)
- In re A.F., 2012-Ohio-2958 (12th Dist. 2012) (12/22-month custody rule discussed; placement history analyzed)
- In re E.B., 2010-Ohio-1122 (12th Dist. 2010) (best-interest factors under R.C. 2151.414(D) guidance)