In Re Shirley B.
18 A.3d 40
| Md. | 2011Background
- Four children were found to be in need of assistance in 2005 and removed from Ms. B.'s care due to neglect, safety concerns, and exposure to violence.
- Ms. B. is cognitively impaired; the Department offered services but funding for specialized supports was not available.
- The Department provided extensive aid (housing, food, medical care, transportation, counseling) but progress toward reunification was limited.
- By 2009 the children had been in foster care for 28 months with no imminent plan for reunification, prompting a permanency plan change to adoption.
- The juvenile court found that the Department had pursued reasonable efforts given resource constraints and changed the plans to adoption, with preserved visitation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did DSS make reasonable efforts to reunify? | B. argues DSS failed due to lack of funded services. | DSS contends efforts were reasonable given funding limits. | Yes; efforts were reasonable under the circumstances. |
| Does funding limitation defeat reasonable efforts? | B. asserts lack of funded services prevented reunification. | DSS notes case-by-case basis with resource constraints. | No; case-specific reasonableness evaluated with available resources. |
| Was the adoption decision an abuse of discretion? | B. contends reunification was still viable with services. | Department and court emphasize safety and lack of progress. | No abuse; adoption in children's best interests. |
| Was ongoing visitation with Ms. B. appropriately maintained? | B. argues that continued contact should be preserved where possible. | Court allowed continued visitation while adoption proceeded. | Yes; visitation to continue where appropriate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rashawn H. and Tyrese H. v. State, 402 Md. 477 (Md. 2007) (presumption in favor of parental custody with limits for safety)
- In re Yve S., 373 Md. 551 (Md. 2003) (balancing best interests with parental rights; likelihood of ongoing abuse)
- In re James G., 178 Md.App. 543 (Md. Ct. App. 2008) (reasonableness of efforts evaluated against available services)
- In re Adoption/Guardianship Nos. J9610436 & J9711031 (Case 36), 368 Md. 666 (Md. 2002) (specialized services for cognitively limited parents; dynamics of service availability)
- In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508 (Tenn. App. 2006) (resource limitations shaping reasonable efforts)