In re Nevaeh R.
2017 IL App (2d) 170229
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Father (Gabriel R.) was incarcerated (aggravated DUI causing death) throughout proceedings; release scheduled May 19, 2017. Children Mary (b.2001) and Nevaeh (b.2008) entered DCFS custody in Dec. 2013 after abuse allegations; adjudicated neglected May 13, 2014.
- DCFS provided an integrated assessment and service plan requiring substance-abuse assessment/treatment by Dec. 30, 2014; father did not request or complete the recommended services during the relevant nine-month periods.
- The State moved to terminate parental rights alleging (I) failure to maintain reasonable interest/concern and (II) failure to make reasonable progress toward reunification during specified nine-month periods.
- Trial court: rejected count I but found father unfit under count II (failure to make reasonable progress), noting incarceration impeded progress; proceeded to best-interest hearing and terminated parental rights as not in children’s best interest to wait for release and completion of services.
- Evidence at best-interest hearing: children bonded with long-term foster parents (Nylunds), were progressing educationally/emotionally, desired finality; caseworker acknowledged termination could harm children but favored permanency with foster family; father testified to maintained bond and visitation while incarcerated but had no home for children.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Gabriel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether father is unfit for failing to make reasonable progress (Adoption Act §1(D)(m)(ii)) during specified nine-month periods | Father failed to complete services and make objective progress toward reunification during the relevant nine-month periods | Court relied impermissibly on incarceration; mere imprisonment alone should not support unfitness | Court affirmed unfitness: father had a service plan and did not apply for/complete required substance-abuse services during the relevant periods; incarceration may impede progress but noncompliance with available services supports finding of unfitness |
| Whether termination of parental rights was in the children’s best interest | Termination is in children’s best interest due to children’s attachment to foster parents, their progress, need for finality and permanence | Termination could harm children; proposed alternative: appoint foster parents as guardians or remand for guardianship consideration | Court held termination was in the children’s best interest: children were integrated with foster family, needed stability/finality, and father lacked a suitable home; appointment of guardianship was inapposite because both parents were found unfit |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Deandre D., 405 Ill. App. 3d 945 (describing the two-step termination process and standards of review)
- In re C.N., 196 Ill. 2d 181 (service-plan necessity and relation to conditions that caused removal)
- In re J.L., 236 Ill. 2d 329 (time in prison counts toward nine-month reasonable-progress period)
- In re J.R.Y., 157 Ill. App. 3d 396 (incarceration alone is not per se proof of failure to make reasonable progress)
- In re D.D., 309 Ill. App. 3d 581 (incarceration can impede reunification and progress assessment)
- In re M.M., 337 Ill. App. 3d 764 (distinguishing guardianship appointment where parent was not found unfit)