In re R.K.
2021 Ohio 3074
Ohio Ct. App. 9th2021Background:
- WCCS filed for temporary custody of Ra.K. (nearly 7) and Re.K. (4) on June 3, 2019, after a domestic disturbance; children were adjudicated dependent and neglected and placed in WCCS temporary custody.
- Records showed significant unmet physical, developmental, speech, feeding, dental, and mental-health needs that were largely untreated in Mother's care.
- Foster parents engaged with providers, coordinated therapies (speech, OT, behavioral, gastroenterology feeding team), and the children made substantial progress in foster placement.
- Mother completed some case-plan tasks, maintained housing and employment, but frequently failed to attend or disrupted medical/therapy appointments, resisted interventions, and tested positive for marijuana or refused screens at times.
- WCCS moved for permanent custody on December 4, 2020; hearing held March 8, 2021; juvenile court found children had been in temporary custody for >12 of a consecutive 22 months and granted WCCS permanent custody as in the children’s best interests.
- Mother appealed solely arguing the permanent-custody award was against the manifest weight of the evidence; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether grant of permanent custody was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Mother: She made substantial progress on her case plan, has stable housing and employment, and can care for the children. | WCCS: Mother failed to engage with or understand children’s complex medical/therapeutic needs, missed/disrupted appointments, and cannot provide needed ongoing care; foster placement provides stability and meets needs. | Affirmed — juvenile court’s best-interest finding supported by clear and convincing evidence and not against the manifest weight. |
| Whether statutory predicate (12 of 22 months in agency custody) was met | Mother: did not meaningfully dispute this finding on appeal. | WCCS: children were in agency custody for the requisite period. | Affirmed — children were in temporary custody for >12 of a consecutive 22-month period, satisfying the statutory prong. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982) (state must prove by clear and convincing evidence before terminating parental rights)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (standards for reviewing whether a judgment is against the manifest weight of the evidence)