In re: the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.L., a Minor Child and his Father, C.H., C.H. v. Marion County Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
49A02-1703-JT-566
| Ind. Ct. App. | Sep 12, 2017Background
- Child C.L. (b. Dec 2011) was removed from mother in Apr 2012; DCS filed CHINS petition and child was placed with maternal grandmother.
- Father (C.H.) largely did not participate in the CHINS case: missed most hearings, failed to maintain contact with DCS, did not attend services or family-team meetings, and saw C.L. infrequently (none for ~2 years at termination hearing).
- Father has a criminal history during the CHINS period (multiple misdemeanor convictions for domestic offenses and later felony drug conviction) and served portions of sentences.
- DCS filed to terminate Father’s parental rights in Feb 2016; termination hearing occurred Feb 2017 while Father resided in a residential center.
- Trial court found (1) a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal would not be remedied, (2) termination was in C.L.’s best interests, and (3) DCS had a satisfactory plan (adoption by grandmother); Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conditions leading to removal will likely be remedied (changed conditions) | Father failed to participate, had minimal contact, and engaged in ongoing criminal activity, so conditions will not be remedied | Father argued conditions were remedied by mother’s consent to adoption and placement with grandmother | Court: Held DCS proved a reasonable probability conditions won’t be remedied; finding not clearly erroneous |
| Whether termination is in child’s best interests | Child is bonded with grandmother, thriving; Father lacks relationship and continued criminality threatens stability | Father requested more time to reunify; contended incarceration alone shouldn’t justify termination | Court: Held termination is in child’s best interests given lack of bond, criminal activity, and child’s stability with grandmother |
| Whether DCS presented a satisfactory plan for the child | Plan is adoption by maternal grandmother (satisfactory and provides permanency) | Father urged child remain with grandmother while he gets more time to reunify | Court: Held adoption plan is satisfactory; rejection of father’s request for more time affirmed |
| Whether overall evidence supports termination by clear and convincing evidence | DCS: evidence of abandonment/minimal participation, criminal history, lack of remediation, best interest and plan satisfied statutory elements | Father: argued insufficient evidence and that continuation does not pose threat; sought relief based on incarceration and placement stability | Court: Held evidence sufficient to terminate parental rights; affirmed judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- In re I.A., 934 N.E.2d 1127 (Ind. 2010) (parental rights are a fundamental liberty interest but may be subordinated to child’s interests)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (recognition of parental custody as a fundamental liberty interest)
- In re J.T., 742 N.E.2d 509 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (court must assess parent’s fitness at termination hearing and habitual conduct predicting future neglect)
- Egly v. Blackford County Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 592 N.E.2d 1232 (Ind. 1992) (DCS must prove termination allegations by clear and convincing evidence)
- Bester v. Lake County Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (reasoning on termination standards and threats to child’s well-being)
- Lang v. Starke Cnty. Office of Family and Children, 861 N.E.2d 366 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (adoption as a satisfactory plan for permanency)