In re S.S.
2013 Ohio 747
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Persinger appeals Logan County Juvenile Court’s permanent-custody ruling regarding her three children S.S. (b. 2005), J.S. (b. 2008), and K.P. (b. 2010).
- The LCCS petitioned for permanent custody after initial abuse/neglect concerns and subsequent dependency findings; Bowman (K.P.’s biological father) and Brian Otis S. (fathers of S.S. and J.S.) were involved, with Bowman later surrendering rights to K.P.
- Case planning focused on reunification with Persinger, counseling, employment, housing, and visitation; Persinger faced incarceration for failure to pay child support and other issues.
- Evidence showed Persinger’s discipline methods, housing instability, and relationships with multiple men raised risk to the children; foster-care placements improved the children’s well-being.
- The trial court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that the children cannot be safely placed with Persinger within a reasonable time and that permanent custody to LCCS was in the children’s best interests.
- Persinger argues she completed her case plan and that the court erred in denying reunification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether permanent custody was proper under the best-interest standard | Persinger contends she completed goals; more time was needed | LCCS argues continued risk and inability to meet needs | Permanent custody affirmed based on best interests and clear-and-convincing evidence |
| Whether Persinger completed the case plan goals or deserved more time to do so | Persinger completed several goals and sought stability | Persinger failed to meet key goals (employment, housing, consistency) due to incarceration | Court held she did not complete key goals and insufficient time was warranted to achieve them |
| Whether the evidence supports the court’s findings of risk from Persinger’s caregiving | Persinger argues she loves her children and can improve | Evidence shows chronic emotional illness, unstable housing, and harmful relationships | Clear-and-convincing evidence supports risk and need for permanent placement |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Murray, 52 Ohio St.3d 155 (Ohio 1990) (parental liberty interest in custody central to decision making)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (fundamental right to parent children safeguarded by due process)
- In re J.L., 176 Ohio App.3d 186 (2008-Ohio-1488) (bond between parent and child; case planning considerations)
- State v. Thompson, 2d Dist. No. 04CA30, 2006-Ohio-582 (Ohio 2006) (direction on applying statutory factors in custody decisions)
- In re Schuerman, 74 Ohio App.3d 528 (Ohio 1991) (parental discipline standards in custody context)