In Re: Zane W.
E2016-02224-COA-R3-PT
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Jul 6, 2017Background
- Child Zane W., born 2011; Mother (Rebecca B.) has long history of substance abuse, mental-health issues, unstable housing, and intermittent custody; DCS first involved in 2012.
- Child placed repeatedly (Safe Families, kinship, then current foster parents); DCS obtained temporary custody July 2014 after abandonment referral; multiple permanency plans followed.
- Mother completed first and second permanency-plan tasks and was returned to custody twice but relapsed each time (intoxicated pickup in Aug 2015; cocaine use Feb 2016 while on probation), resulting in repeated removals.
- DCS filed to terminate Mother's parental rights April 5, 2016; bench trial Sept. 2016; Father surrendered rights; trial court found three statutory grounds (abandonment by wanton disregard, persistence of conditions, substantial noncompliance) and that termination served the child's best interests.
- Court of Appeals reversed the persistence-of-conditions and substantial-noncompliance findings but affirmed abandonment-by-wanton-disregard and the best-interest ruling; remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Persistence of conditions (Tenn. Code Ann. §36-1-113(g)(3)) | Conditions that led to removal persist; termination appropriate | Mother: conditions were addressed/completed; DCS conceded this ground on appeal | Reversed (DCS did not defend on appeal) |
| 2. Substantial noncompliance with permanency plans (§36-1-113(g)(2)) | Mother failed to follow aftercare/mental-health recommendations and verify recovery meetings; noncompliance justifies termination | Mother showed completion of major tasks, attended treatment, submitted assessments and some proof; failures were minor/technical | Reversed — evidence not clear and convincing of substantial noncompliance |
| 3. Abandonment by wanton disregard (incarceration-triggered §36-1-102(1)(A)(iv)) | Mother's conduct (drug use while on probation, intoxicated parenting, leaving child with prohibited boyfriend) shows wanton disregard for child's welfare | Mother contested severity/characterization but admitted substance use and probation violation; argued compliance efforts | Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence that Mother's conduct exhibits wanton disregard |
| 4. Best interests of child (§36-1-113(i)) | Child is thriving in foster home; instability and repeated relapses support termination | Mother: has employment, stable housing, completed many services, maintains contact and support | Affirmed — totality of circumstances favors termination (child stable, risk of relapse, history of removals) |
Key Cases Cited
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (parental rights are a fundamental liberty interest)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (higher burden—clear and convincing—required in termination cases)
- In re Angela E., 303 S.W.3d 240 (Tenn. 2010) (parental rights are fundamental but not absolute)
- In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507 (Tenn. 2016) (appellate review standards and consideration of trial-court findings)
- In re Valentine, 79 S.W.3d 539 (Tenn. 2002) (definition and review of substantial noncompliance with permanency plans)
- In re M.J.B., 140 S.W.3d 643 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) (clarifies substantial noncompliance requires more than minor deviations)
- In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) (incarceration-triggered wanton-disregard analysis)