In re T.W.
2016 Ohio 92
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- T.W., born 2008, was removed from parents’ custody after an incident where Father, with a long history of violent crime and a sexual-offense conviction, was discovered in the home during a police standoff; both parents were arrested and T.W. taken into custody.
- Summit County Children Services Board (CSB) filed a complaint alleging abuse, neglect, and dependency; parents stipulated to facts and adjudication; T.W. placed temporarily with maternal great-aunt (Aunt).
- Case plan required parental mental-health treatment, parenting evaluation, and cessation of Mother’s live-in relationship with Father; Mother obtained an evaluation but attended counseling inconsistently and remained defensive about Father’s risk.
- Father refused recommended treatment, denied past offenses, and had a long criminal history including designation as a sexual predator and repeated registration violations.
- T.W. developed PTSD and behavioral issues; Aunt actively participated in therapy, provided stable care for 18 months, and facilitated visitation; counselor opposed a change in caregiver.
- Magistrate granted CSB’s and guardian ad litem’s motion for legal custody to Aunt; trial court overruled parents’ objections and affirmed; Mother appealed raising multiple errors.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | CSB/Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CSB failed to make reasonable reunification efforts / conflict of interest | Caseworker impeded Mother’s contact and there was conflict of interest | CSB provided referrals, replaced caseworker after complaint, and Mother/ Father failed to follow through | No error — reunification efforts were reasonable; assignment overruled |
| Admissibility and expert qualification of witnesses | Counselor records and psychologist testimony were admitted unfairly; psychologist unqualified | Parties received notice; no timely objection at hearing; issues forfeited absent plain error | No plain error; testimony admissible; assignments overruled |
| Whether legal custody to Aunt was against child’s best interest / against manifest weight / unsupported by evidence | Mother substantially complied with case plan; being mother entitles her to preference; problems causing removal resolved | Best interest standard governs post-adjudication; Mother did not complete plan, lacked insight, and Aunt provided stable, therapeutic care | Court affirmed legal custody to Aunt as in child’s best interest; assignments overruled |
| Whether trial court violated Mother’s fundamental right to parent | Placement with relative deprived Mother of fundamental rights without finding of unfitness | After adjudication of abuse/neglect, court may decide custody based on child’s best interest; adjudication reflects parental unsuitability | No violation; adjudication sufficed and best-interest standard applied; assignment overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- In re C.R., 108 Ohio St.3d 369 (Ohio 2006) (adjudication of abuse/neglect constitutes determination of parental unsuitability for custody decisions)
- In re D.R., 153 Ohio App.3d 156 (9th Dist. 2003) (legal-custody decisions after adjudication are governed by child’s best interest)