In the Interest of A.B.
19 A.3d 1084
Pa. Super. Ct.2011Background
- Guardian ad litem appeals orders denying CYS petition to change permanency goals from reunification to adoption.
- Children (B.B., A.B., M.B.) were dependents; mothers had safety concerns including Maternal Grandfather’s abuse history and noncompliance with treatment.
- CYS sponsored goals for reunification with a concurrent goal of adoption; two years in placement prior to petition for goal change.
- Trial court found strong mother–child bond and mother’s protective efforts against Grandfather; social services noted continuing concerns.
- Judge denied goal change after evaluating statutory factors under 42 Pa.C.S. § 6351(f) and found no compelling reasons for adoption.
- Guardian ad litem timely appealed; panel affirmed denial of goal change.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the transition home finding was in the children’s best interests | Guardian ad litem argues bond and suitability argue for adoption | Court found strong bond and safety plan; best interests favored reunification | No error; bond and best interests supported denial of adoption |
| Whether failure to change goal after 24 months was error | R.J.T. framework requires change after 24 months absent compelling reasons | Concurrent planning allowed adoption while maintaining reunification goal | Not an abuse of discretion; goal change denied under § 6351(f) factors |
Key Cases Cited
- In re R.J.T., 990 A.2d 777 (Pa. Super. 2010) (mechanical application of § 6351(f)(9) rejected; concurrent planning permitted adoption and reunification)
- In re R.J.T., II, 9 A.3d 1179 (Pa. 2010) (Supreme Court clarified § 6351(f) factors and deference to trial court findings)
- In re N.C., 909 A.2d 818 (Pa. Super. 2006) (underlying policy prioritizes safety, permanency, well-being of child)
- In re Adoption of M.E.P., 825 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Super. 2003) (parental rights not to override child’s permanency needs)