In the Interest of J. A. B. Et Al., Children
336 Ga. App. 367
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Three children (born 2007, 2009, 2011) were taken into DFCS custody after a January 2013 traffic stop in Georgia; mother arrested for marijuana and cruelty-to-children counts; family otherwise resided out of state.
- Children were adjudicated deprived (dependent) in February 2013; initially reunification-focused plan, later changed to non-reunification; children placed with maternal grandmother in Indiana in December 2013.
- DFCS filed a petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights in September 2014; the juvenile court granted termination on February 2, 2015. Grandmother remains willing to adopt and children are reported to be thriving.
- Juvenile court’s order recited findings of dependency (likelihood to continue and cause serious harm), the mother’s failure to complete case-plan tasks, and limited visitation (5 of 15 scheduled, none in prior 16 months), and concluded the mother had abandoned the children.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals held the juvenile court’s order failed to specify which statutory ground (dependency under OCGA §15-11-310(5) or abandonment under OCGA §15-11-310(4)) supported termination and found the factual support for either ground unclear or insufficient, so it vacated the termination and remanded for fuller findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (DFCS/Juvenile Court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the juvenile court identified the statutory ground(s) for termination (dependency vs abandonment) | Order insufficiently supported dependency; court misapplied law | Juvenile court relied on dependency findings and abandonment language to terminate | Court: Order ambiguous as to which statutory ground was relied on; remand required for clarification |
| Whether evidence supported termination based on dependency (continued dependency likely and causing serious harm) | Evidence did not show the necessary likelihood of serious physical, mental, emotional, or moral harm | DFCS pointed to mother’s poor care, incomplete case plan, and instability | Court: Record lacks compelling factual proof required for dependency-based termination; evidentiary support is weak |
| Whether evidence supported termination based on abandonment (intent to forgo duties—visitation and case-plan participation) | Visitation gaps explained by geographic and practical obstacles; procedural compliance questions do not prove intent to abandon | DFCS emphasized sporadic visits, failure to complete paperwork and case-plan tasks | Court: Simply noting missed visits and paperwork is inadequate to prove abandonment without considering context; record insufficient |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interests given the record | Mother argued termination not justified and best interests analysis cannot be reviewed without clear statutory grounds | Juvenile court concluded termination was in childrens’ best interests given dependency/abandonment and grandmother’s stable placement | Court: Could not intelligently review best-interests conclusion because statutory ground(s) and factual findings were not sufficiently developed; remand ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Interest of C.J.V., 333 Ga. App. 844 (2015) (new Juvenile Code applies where termination petition filed after effective date)
- In the Interest of C.J.V., 323 Ga. App. 283 (2013) (parental-rights termination demands careful scrutiny)
- In the Interest of A.B., 311 Ga. App. 629 (2011) (appellate review views evidence in light most favorable to juvenile court)
- In the Interest of D.T.A., 312 Ga. App. 26 (2011) (juvenile court must make specific findings and state the process by which decision was reached)
- In the Interest of J.S.B., 277 Ga. App. 660 (2006) (parental inability to provide care does not automatically satisfy high burden for termination)
- In the Interest of S.O.C., 332 Ga. App. 738 (2015) (termination requires compelling facts due to constitutional significance)
- In the Interest of K.E.A., 292 Ga. App. 239 (2008) (abandonment found where parent failed to take required steps after release from incarceration)
- Grantham v. Grantham, 269 Ga. 413 (1998) (remand appropriate when findings are insufficient to permit intelligent appellate review)