In the Interest of: A.J.B., a Minor, 1571 EDA 2016

A.J.B. born June 2013 premature; both mother and infant tested positive for opiates; child was in hospital ~2.5 months then discharged to Mother.
DHS became involved July 2013; children adjudicated dependent November 21, 2013 and placed in a pre‑adoptive foster home with half‑siblings.
Father did not engage with DHS until August 2015, despite suspecting he was the father as early as August 2014 and having received photos via social media.
Court-ordered paternity testing (March 2016) confirmed paternity (99.99%); weekly supervised visits were ordered, but Father attended only two of six offered and terminated one visit after ten minutes.
DHS filed to involuntarily terminate Father’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. §2511(a)(1), (2) and (b); trial court terminated rights under (a)(1), (2) and (b); Father appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (DHS)	Defendant's Argument (Father)	Held
Whether Father evidenced a settled purpose to relinquish or failed to perform parental duties under §2511(a)(1)	Father failed to perform parental duties for the relevant period; did not engage in dependency, visitation, housing documentation	Father argued he did not know he was the father until paternity testing, Mother hid child, and his work/other obligations prevented participation	Court held clear and convincing evidence Father failed to perform duties; excuses rejected; termination affirmed
Whether repeated/continued incapacity/refusal caused lack of essential parental care under §2511(a)(2)	DHS argued Father’s prolonged inaction and lack of meaningful contact left child without essential parental care	Father argued inability to remedy due to lack of knowledge, concealment by Mother, and scheduling conflicts	Court relied on (a)(1) ground and found conditions not remedied; termination under (a)(2) supported by record

In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) (standard of review and deference to trial court in termination cases)
In re T.R., 465 A.2d 642 (Pa. 1983) (termination petition burden: clear and convincing evidence)
Matter of Sylvester, 555 A.2d 1202 (Pa. 1989) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
In re B.L.W., 843 A.2d 380 (Pa. Super. 2004) (need only agree with any one §2511 subsection to affirm)
In re A.S., 11 A.3d 473 (Pa. Super. 2010) (consider entire case background for §2511(a)(1))
In re B.,N.M., 856 A.2d 847 (Pa. Super. 2004) (parental duties defined as affirmative performance related to child’s needs)
In re C.M.S., 832 A.2d 457 (Pa. Super. 2003) (parental obligation requires good faith effort and utilization of resources)
In re Z.S.W., 946 A.2d 726 (Pa. Super. 2008) (post‑abandonment inquiry: explanation, contact, and §2511(b) effect)