In re Michael B.
M2015-02497-COA-R3-PT
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Oct 6, 2016Background
- Child born 2007 to Kaygen B. (Mother) and Jonathan B. (Father). Parents divorced in 2009; Father became primary residential parent by agreed permanent parenting plan in 2012.
- Mother struggled with prescription opioids, heroin addiction, prostitution, criminal arrests, and intermittent incarceration (notably Aug–Nov 2013). Father and his wife (Stepmother) cared for the child; child stabilized in their home.
- Appellees (Father and Stepmother) filed to terminate Mother’s parental rights on Jan 31, 2014, alleging abandonment (willful failure to visit, willful failure to support, wanton disregard) and persistence of conditions; trial held Aug 2015.
- Trial court found clear and convincing evidence as to willful failure to visit (during the 4 months preceding Mother’s Aug 20, 2013 incarceration), willful failure to support, and wanton disregard; also found termination was in the child’s best interest.
- On appeal, this Court affirmed willful failure to visit and wanton disregard, reversed as to willful failure to support, and affirmed the best-interest finding and termination of Mother’s rights.
Issues
| Issue | Appellees' Argument | Mother’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Willful failure to visit (Apr 20–Aug 19, 2013 window) | Mother saw child only tokenly; had ability to arrange contact but did not; failure was intentional | Restraining order and Father’s alleged nonresponsiveness prevented contact | Affirmed — willful, token visitation; Mother had ability and did not reasonably attempt contact |
| Willful failure to support (same 4‑month window) | Mother earned income (albeit illegal) and made no payments; thus willfully failed to support | No proof of Mother’s income/ability to pay; divorce order relieved parties of support obligations; no capacity shown | Reversed — insufficient evidence of Mother’s capacity to pay and reasonable excuse raised by agreed divorce order |
| Wanton disregard for child’s welfare (conduct prior to incarceration) | Repeated drug use, prostitution, criminal conduct, and instability show a "me first" pattern putting child at risk | Mother argues she designated Father primary residential parent and cared about child | Affirmed — mother’s addiction, criminality, relapses, and related conduct demonstrated wanton disregard |
| Best interest of the child | Termination needed for child’s stability; child thriving with Father/Stepmother; Mother’s improvements were recent and uncertain | Mother argued recent sobriety and support letters showed changed circumstances | Affirmed — considering statutory factors, evidence supports that termination is in child’s best interest |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parental rights are fundamental liberty interests)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (termination requires heightened proof)
- In re Angela E., 303 S.W.3d 240 (Tenn. 2010) (parental rights not absolute; state parens patriae interest)
- In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507 (Tenn. 2016) (appellate review standards in termination cases)
- In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (definitions and willfulness analysis for abandonment)
- In re Adoption of A.M.H., 215 S.W.3d 793 (Tenn. 2007) (standards for appellate review and willfulness)
- In re M.J.B., 140 S.W.3d 643 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (clear-and-convincing standard explanation)
- In re Valentine, 79 S.W.3d 539 (Tenn. 2002) (statutory requirement to prove ground and best interest)