In Re: Michael B., Jr.
E2017-00486-COA-R3-PT
Tenn. Ct. App.Aug 11, 2017Background
- DCS filed to terminate Mother’s parental rights to two children removed January 7, 2015; children later adjudicated dependent and neglected. Trial occurred Dec 2016–Jan 2017. Mother appealed.
- Permanency plans (Apr and Aug 2015) required assessments, drug/alcohol treatment, random drug screens, homemaker services, stable income, mental-health and parenting services, and visitation.
- DCS workers repeatedly found the home cluttered, bug-infested, with lack of heat/electricity; Mother often unavailable for visits, missed appointments, and had inconsistent contact with DCS.
- Mother had multiple positive drug tests over the case (marijuana, opiates, amphetamines, cocaine, etc.), missed many scheduled drug screens, and failed to complete recommended treatment programs despite referrals and some in‑home services.
- Mother maintained generally consistent visitation and a bond with the children, but did not remedy home, substance abuse, or mental‑health issues; foster parents provided stability and expressed willingness to adopt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether grounds existed to terminate based on abandonment for failure to establish a suitable home | DCS: made reasonable efforts in 4‑month period; Mother made minimal effort; home remained unsuitable | Mother: DCS delayed services; issues not easily remedied; DCS should have done more earlier | Held: Affirmed. DCS made reasonable efforts; Mother failed to make effort; ground proved by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether grounds existed for substantial noncompliance with permanency plans | DCS: plan requirements were reasonable and related to removal causes; Mother substantially failed to comply | Mother: attempted some services/assessments and visited children; hardships impeded completion | Held: Affirmed. Mother substantially noncompliant (effort insufficient; multiple uncompleted tasks) |
| Whether grounds existed for persistence of conditions | DCS: drug use, mental‑health issues, and unsafe home persisted over time and unlikely to be remedied soon | Mother: recent enrollment in classes and services; personal grief and hardship explain delays | Held: Affirmed. Conditions persisted and diminished children’s chance for early permanency |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interest | DCS: children have stability in foster home, need permanency; Mother’s drug use and unsafe home risk children’s well‑being | Mother: maintains bond and visitation; has begun some services shortly before trial | Held: Affirmed. Best‑interest factors favor termination (safety, stability, parental inability to provide care) |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (recognition of parental liberty interest)
- Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645 (parental rights as fundamental liberty)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (heightened proof requirement in termination cases)
- In re Angela E., 303 S.W.3d 240 (Tenn. 2010) (parental rights not absolute; standard of review principles)
- In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507 (Tenn. 2016) (appellate review of termination findings)
- In re Valentine, 79 S.W.3d 539 (Tenn. 2002) (standards for permanency plan noncompliance)
- In re M.J.B., 140 S.W.3d 643 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (clear‑and‑convincing definition and analysis)
- Hawk v. Hawk, 855 S.W.2d 573 (Tenn. 1993) (State’s parens patriae role)