2018 Ohio 883
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Three children (born 2008, 2009, 2012) were removed after being found unsupervised and the family home described as "deplorable;" initial emergency custody to Lucas County Children Services (LCCS) August 2014.
- Children adjudicated neglected; reunification case plan implemented, children returned to mother December 2015 with protective supervision; removed again May 25, 2016 after reports of suicidal statements by oldest child, lack of food, and inadequate supervision.
- Mother has diagnoses including major depressive disorder and PTSD, history of substance abuse, domestic-violence involvement, and inconsistent engagement in recommended services (substance-abuse aftercare, mental-health counseling, parenting supports).
- LCCS filed for permanent custody Oct 24, 2016, alleging mother failed to remedy conditions, had chronic mental-health/substance issues, and had inconsistent compliance with case plan and children’s counseling.
- Trial court found statutory grounds under R.C. 2151.414(E) (including E(1) and E(2)) by clear and convincing evidence and that permanent custody was in the children’s best interests; mother appealed on two grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (LCCS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the permanent-custody award was against the manifest weight of the evidence because LCCS did not investigate/confirm the May 25, 2016 removal conditions | Mother argued LCCS failed to investigate/confirm conditions underlying the second removal, so evidence was insufficient | LCCS produced testimony and records documenting prior and intervening removals, services offered, children's statements, and ongoing concerns about supervision, housing, mental health, and substance use | Court held evidence was competent and credible; clear-and-convincing proof supported R.C. 2151.414(E) findings and permanent custody was not against manifest weight |
| Whether LCCS failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify and improperly withheld prescribed psychotropic medication for the children | Mother claimed she was not given a case plan after the second removal and that LCCS unlawfully refused medication, impeding reunification | LCCS demonstrated that amended and updated case plans were filed within 60 days of the second removal and during the case; agency policies and clinical judgment governed psychotropic medication decisions for children in custody | Court held reasonable efforts had been made (case plans filed) and LCCS’s medication decisions were lawful and did not cause mother’s failure to remedy conditions; second assignment rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- In re William S., 75 Ohio St.3d 95, 661 N.E.2d 738 (Ohio 1996) (one enumerated R.C. 2151.414(E) factor can suffice to support permanent custody)
- In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361, 481 N.E.2d 613 (Ohio 1985) (clear-and-convincing evidence standard defined)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469, 120 N.E.2d 118 (Ohio 1954) (definition of clear-and-convincing evidence quoted)
- In re C.F., 113 Ohio St.3d 73, 862 N.E.2d 816 (Ohio 2007) (reasonable-efforts requirement does not apply to motions for permanent custody but the agency must show reasonable efforts were made during prior proceedings)