In re M.S.
2012 Ohio 3207
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Mother and Father are parents of M.S., D.S., and A.S., ages five, four, and one at the time of permanent custody hearing.
- The family has a history of substance abuse and unstable housing; Father is a registered sex offender with prior 1992 rape conviction and ~12.5 years imprisonment.
- Domestic violence incidents in June 2009 led to Children Services seeking adjudication; M.S. and D.S. were adjudicated dependent in August 2009; A.S. born November 2009 and adjudicated dependent in December 2009.
- Children were placed with their maternal grandmother, then returned to Mother under protective supervision, but were again placed in foster care in September 2009 and remained there through the proceedings.
- Mother regained custody in March 2010 but, by August 2010, Children Services regained temporary custody due to concerns; proceedings continued with foster placements.
- Children Services filed for permanent custody in March and July 2011; after hearings, the trial court found 12+ months of custody within a 22-month window and ordered permanent custody to the agency, terminating parental rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody is in the children's best interests | Mother argues best interests are not supported by competent evidence | Children Services contends best interests support permanent custody due to custodial history and foster success | Yes; court’s best-interests finding supported by competent evidence |
| Whether the agency made reasonable efforts to reunify Father | Father contends agency failed to assist with housing and reunification | Agency provided services and referrals; evidence shows reasonable efforts | Yes; Agency's reasonable efforts found and plain-error not shown |
Key Cases Cited
- In re D.A., 113 Ohio St.3d 88 (2007-Ohio-1105) (fundamental parent-rights encroached by permanent termination; protections apply)
- In re McCain, 2007-Ohio-1429 (2007-Ohio-1429) (permanent custody standards and clear-and-convincing evidence)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73 (2007-Ohio-1104) (proper application of R.C. 2151.414 and 2151.419 for permanent custody)
- In re A.C., 2004-Ohio-5531 (2004-Ohio-5531) (reunification standards and consideration of relative placement)
- In re D.N., 2011-Ohio-3395 (2011-Ohio-3395) (best interests framework under R.C. 2151.414(D)(1))