In re S.J., 2013 Ohio 3653

S.J. was born on October 31, 2009 and placed in MCCS temporary custody shortly after birth due to concerns about hygiene, care, mother’s mental health, parental income, and prior involvement with a half-sibling.
S.J. was adjudicated dependent in January 2010; temporary custody extensions were ordered in November 2010 and July 2011, with a planned end date of November 2, 2011.
MCCS moved for permanent custody on November 2, 2011; hearings were held in March and May 2012; MCCS presented testimony from a caseworker and a psychologist who evaluated the parents in 2010.
Father’s case plan required a parenting/psychological assessment, visitation assessment, parenting class, GED/reading improvement, stable income and housing, and better hygiene; mother’s case plan included different requirements.
The home environment observed in March 2012 was found unsafe and unclean (roaches, many animals, structural repairs needed); MCCS concluded the residence was not appropriate for S.J.
S.J. had been with the same foster family since birth, was bonded to them, and was deemed adoptable; guardian ad litem recommended permanent custody to MCCS; MCCS considered multiple potential placements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is permanent custody to MCCS in S.J.'s best interest?	S.J. is bonded with foster family; needs are met; no viable secure placements remain.	N/A	Yes; in best interest by clear and convincing evidence.
Did MCCS make every reasonable effort to prevent removal or remedy initial problems?	MCCS provided case planning and referrals; some objectives remained unmet.	MCCS should be found to have made reasonable efforts by documenting referrals and services.	Yes; substantial evidence supported ongoing efforts and failure to substantially remedy.
Was reliance on Dr. King’s outdated evaluation improper?	Dr. King’s assessment informed best-interest judgment.	No updated evaluation necessary for the weight of the evidence.	Overruled; weight of the evidence still supported termination.

In re A.U., 2008-Ohio-186 (2d Dist. Montgomery 2008) (credibility determinations entrusted to the trial court)
In re J.Y., 2008-Ohio-3485 (2d Dist. Miami 2008) (credibility and weight of evidence for trial court)
In re K.M., 2012-Ohio-6010 (8th Dist. Cuyahoga 2012) (statutory standards for permanent custody and best interests)
In re S.J., Jr., 2013-Ohio-2935 (2d Dist. Montgomery 2013) (related permanent custody decision for another party in the same matter)
In re S.J., 2013-Ohio-3653 (2d Dist. Montgomery 2013) (appeal affirming trial court’s permanent custody ruling)