In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of R.Q. and N.Q.: K.Q. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
14A01-1603-JT-524
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 14, 2016Background
- Mother arrested in Oct 2013 for heating narcotics in home; older child N.O. witnessed drug use; convicted Dec 2013 for meth possession and neglect.
- In Dec 2013 Mother experienced a psychotic episode (hearing voices); drug tests in Jan–Feb 2014 were positive for meth; newborn R.Q. also tested positive at birth (Feb 2014).
- DCS removed both children, filed CHINS petition (Feb 2014), and court ordered Mother to complete substance‑use treatment, mental‑health care, stable housing, employment, and regular casework contact.
- DCS repeatedly referred Mother to multiple services (therapy, SAFE, psychiatric evaluation, inpatient options, case management); case reviews from Aug 2014 through Nov 2015 documented ongoing noncompliance, missed appointments, positive drug tests, unstable housing, and terminated visitation after an incident where Mother threw R.Q. onto the floor.
- Clinical evidence at termination hearing: Mother diagnosed with schizophrenia and methamphetamine‑induced psychotic disorder; psychologist testified schizophrenia is usually lifelong and Mother exhibited active psychosis and violent ideation. CASA and FCM recommended termination.
- Trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights (Feb 2016), finding clear and convincing evidence that the removal conditions would not be remedied, continuation of the relationship posed a threat, and termination was in the children’s best interests. Mother appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | DCS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied | DCS failed to provide proper services; therefore conditions could be remedied if services adequate | Mother repeatedly failed to comply with referrals, had ongoing drug use, unstable housing, and persistent psychosis—predicting future neglect | Court affirmed: evidence clearly and convincingly supports that conditions will not be remedied |
| Whether termination is in the children’s best interests | Mother argued termination was erroneous given claimed service failures and any improvements | CASA, FCM, and evidence of unremedied conditions supported that children’s interests required permanency and safety | Court affirmed: totality of evidence supports termination as in children’s best interests |
Key Cases Cited
- In re K.T.K., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 2013) (standard of review for parental‑rights termination; burden of proof)
- In re V.A., 51 N.E.3d 1140 (Ind. 2016) (review whether findings are supported by clear and convincing evidence)
- In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (two‑step analysis for whether removal conditions will be remedied and weighing recent change against habitual conduct)
- In re A.D.S., 987 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (totality of evidence and role of CASA/FCM recommendations in best‑interests analysis)
- R.J. v. Ind. Dep’t. of Child Servs., 56 N.E.3d 729 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (disjunctive nature of statutory grounds under subsection (B) requiring proof of only one listed circumstance)