In the Interest of C. J. V.
323 Ga. App. 283
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Mother appeals termination of parental rights of her children, C. J. V. (b. Jan 2007) and F. N. R. (b. Jan 2009).
- Juvenile court terminated rights; appellate review uses clear and convincing standard and deferential view to court’s findings.
- Evidence showed deprivation but failed to show the cause was likely to continue or not be remedied; no verifiable mental/physical deficiency.
- Petition filed May 24, 2012; initial case plan entered June 29, 2011; reunification goals included employment, housing, visitation, vocational rehab, psychological evaluation, and child support.
- At termination hearing (Aug 2012) mother had secured employment for 3–4 months, anticipated recall by employer, lived in a small apartment, paid some child support, maintained visitation and bond with children.
- Court reversed and remanded for reunification plan; concurrence/analysis criticized reliance on poverty and premature termination; Andrews dissents; final disposition unsettled by future events.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deprivation likely to continue? | Mother’s progress and economic improvements show potential for reunification. | Unstable income/housing and incomplete plan support continuing deprivation. | Not clearly and convincingly shown; reversal and remand. |
| Poverty alone as basis for termination? | Poverty cannot justify termination by itself. | Poverty and noncompliance indicate deprivation will continue. | Poverty alone not a basis for termination; reversal. |
| Should trial court credit progress toward reunification? | Mother made progress (employment, bonding, payments). | Court appropriately weighed deficiencies and timing of improvements. | Court erred by discounting progress; reversal. |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Interest of C. S., 319 Ga. App. 138 (Ga. App. 2012) (standard of review for termination appeals; evidence viewed in favor of court’s decision)
- In the Interest of D. L. T. C., 299 Ga. App. 765 (Ga. App. 2009) (requires clear and convincing evidence that deprivation will continue)
- In the Interest of C. T., 286 Ga. App. 186 (Ga. App. 2007) (poverty alone is not a basis for termination)
- Chancey v. Dept. of Human Resources, 156 Ga. App. 338 (Ga. App. 1980) (unemployment and housing instability alone do not mandate termination)
- In the Interest of J. E., 309 Ga. App. 51 (Ga. App. 2011) (discusses termination standards and need for explicit fact findings)