In re The Matter of The Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of: I.B. and J.B. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 20A03-1707-JT-1505

Child born April 29, 2015; tested positive for cocaine at birth; Mother admitted drug use and voluntarily relinquished parental rights.
DCS filed CHINS petition May 15, 2015; Child placed with Father but dispositional order required Father to complete therapy, addictions assessment, home-based case management, and psychological evaluation.
Father failed to complete required services, was arrested for public intoxication in Aug. 2015 (leading to Child’s removal), and has multiple prior alcohol-related convictions and other criminal matters including Michigan probation and outstanding Indiana warrants.
Placement with paternal grandmother was denied through ICPC; Child was placed in foster care and remained there for most of her life; foster parents intend to adopt.
DCS filed a verified petition to terminate Father’s parental rights (Feb. 1, 2017); evidentiary hearing held May–June 2017; Father did not present evidence and missed many visitations.
Juvenile court found (1) conditions causing removal would not be remedied, (2) continuation of relationship posed a threat, and (3) termination was in Child’s best interests; court terminated Father’s parental rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether termination was supported by clear and convincing evidence that the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied	DCS: Father failed to complete services, has continued criminal and substance issues, missed visits, and thus conditions are unlikely to change	Father: Evidence insufficient to show reasonable probability conditions will not be remedied	Held: Court affirmed—clear and convincing evidence supports finding conditions will not be remedied
Whether continuation of parent–child relationship poses a threat to child’s well‑being	DCS: Father’s instability, noncompliance, and criminal history pose a risk	Father: Insufficient proof of threat	Held: Court did not need to decide because remedy prong satisfied; threat argument unnecessary to address
Whether termination is in child’s best interests	DCS: CASA and case manager recommended termination; permanency and adoption by foster parents serve child’s best interests	Father: Termination not shown to be best for child	Held: Court affirmed—recommendations, unremedied conditions, and permanency support best‑interest finding
Standard of review for termination appeals	DCS: Juvenile court findings should be upheld if supported by clear and convincing evidence	Father: challenged sufficiency of evidence only	Held: Appellate court reviews only supporting evidence and reasonable inferences; findings affirmed as not clearly erroneous

In re K.T.K., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 2013) (standard of review and deference to juvenile court findings in termination cases)
In re Bester, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (termination law centers on child protection, not punishment)
In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (parental noncooperation with services supports termination)
In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (two-step analysis for whether removal conditions will be remedied)
A.D.S. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 987 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (factors showing habitual conduct and evaluating services response)
In re H.L., 915 N.E.2d 145 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (totality of evidence for best‑interest determination)
In re A.S., 17 N.E.3d 994 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (case manager and CASA recommendations plus unremedied conditions can satisfy best‑interest requirement)
In re A.K., 924 N.E.2d 212 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (statutory disjunctive means proving either remedy or threat prong is sufficient)