In re M,T, and T.T., Juveniles, 2016-318

DCF filed a CHINS petition in March 2014 for M.T. (2) and T.T. (1) based on parental substance abuse; DCF involvement began in 2013 when T.T. was born with cocaine and THC in her system.
Parents stipulated to CHINS in May 2014; a conditional care order with services was later revoked for noncompliance and the children were placed in foster care.
A disposition plan adopted in Sept. 2014 set concurrent goals of reunification or adoption; by March–April 2015 DCF recommended adoption and filed to terminate parental rights due to ongoing drug use, inconsistent engagement with services, and lack of parenting progress.
Parents had a third child in Sept. 2015 born with cocaine in her system and placed in DCF custody (separate proceeding).
After a two-day hearing, the family court found parents had not sufficiently addressed substance abuse, engaged with providers, or developed parenting skills; parents’ inconsistent and stressful visits harmed the children, who had since bonded with foster parents.
The court concluded termination of residual parental rights was in the children’s best interests; both parents appealed.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	Father’s Argument	Held
Whether court erred in assessing parent–child bond for mother	Court failed to assess mother’s individual bond and understated strength of mother–child bond	N/A (respondent: court’s findings supported by observations of visits)	No error; court made individualized findings showing mother was overwhelmed, unresponsive at visits, and bond was not materially stronger than father’s
Whether court improperly relied on hearsay that children voiced not wanting visits	Testimony that daycare reported children said they didn’t want visits was unreliable hearsay and should not be used	Mother did not object at trial; hearsay may be admitted and relied on for probative value	Not preserved and, in any event, admissible; the record shows the finding was not a significant basis for termination
Whether termination improperly based on factors beyond father’s control (medical issues, poverty, housing, mother’s addiction)	N/A	Father argued court relied on factors beyond his control to terminate rights	Rejected; court relied on father’s failure to address substance abuse, engage in services, attend visits, and develop parenting skills — failures attributable to father

In re S.B., 174 Vt. 427 (mem.) (standard of appellate review in termination proceedings: abuse of discretion)
In re C.P., 193 Vt. 29 (2012) (affirming deference to family court findings unless clearly erroneous)
In re D.C., 157 Vt. 659 (1991) (failure to object at trial preserves evidentiary issues for appeal)
In re A.F., 160 Vt. 175 (1993) (hearsay admissible in termination proceedings but cannot be sole basis for termination)
In re D.D., 194 Vt. 508 (2013) (judgment will not be reversed if some unsupported findings exist but other findings adequately support judgment)
In re S.R., 157 Vt. 417 (1991) (termination may not be based on factors beyond parents’ control)