In Re The Welfare Of: L.d. Ashley Dukellis v. Dshs, 74457-7

Child L.D., born Feb. 2013; mother Ashley Dukellis tested positive for marijuana and methamphetamine during pregnancy and at birth; mother later admitted methamphetamine use during pregnancy.
DSHS filed dependency; court ordered services including chemical dependency assessment, mental health treatment, parenting education, random UA testing, and domestic violence services.
Over ~32 months, services were offered; the court found mother did not substantially engage in necessary services and had profound mental health issues and ongoing substance abuse risk.
Trial court found little likelihood conditions would be remedied, mother unfit to parent, and continuation of the parent-child relationship would diminish child’s prospects for early integration into a stable home.
Court ordered termination of Ashley’s parental rights but also indicated that nonparental contact (e.g., in an open adoption) would be in the child’s best interest; mother appealed alleging irreconcilable findings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Dukellis)	Defendant's Argument (State/Respondent)	Held
Whether findings that both terminate parental rights and endorse continued mother–child contact are irreconcilable and render termination invalid	The court’s findings are ambiguous and inconsistent: it cannot be in the child’s best interest both to terminate the parent–child relationship and to maintain a parent–child relationship with her	The court’s findings distinguish between parental (legal) rights and nonparental contact; termination of legal relationship is consistent with permitting nonparental contact (e.g., open adoption) if in child’s interest	Court held findings are reconcilable: termination is in child’s best interest and endorsing nonparental contact does not create ambiguity or deny due process

Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982) (parens patriae; due process and high burden required to terminate parental rights)
In re Welfare of M.R.H., 145 Wn. App. 10 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008) (definition of "clear, cogent and convincing" standard)
In re Interest of J.F., 109 Wn. App. 718 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001) (unchallenged findings treated as verities on appeal)
In re Aschauer, 93 Wn.2d 689 (Wash. 1980) (standard for reviewing whether evidence supports findings in dependency/termination matters)