In the Interest of J. M., a Child, 337 Ga. App. 811

Background

J.M. born March 4, 2014; mother and child tested positive for methamphetamine. DFACS took custody and placed J.M. in foster care shortly after birth.
Putative father filed a petition to legitimate J.M. (Dec. 4, 2014). DNA established paternity; hearing held April 27, 2015. Juvenile court denied legitimation by written order entered September 1, 2015; denial affirmed on appeal.
At the time of the hearing the putative father had a long history of substance abuse (heroin then methamphetamine), recent criminal arrests, and was incarcerated awaiting trial; he had sporadic employment and no stable housing or prior children.
DFACS created a case plan requiring housing, legitimation, parenting classes, substance-abuse assessment/treatment, negative drug tests, psychological evaluation, and inpatient rehabilitation; the father completed some evaluations but tested positive on DFACS drug tests and failed to complete significant parts of the plan.
The mother opposed legitimation, had surrendered parental rights to prioritize the child’s stability in foster placement, and the guardian ad litem recommended denial based on the father’s drug history and unstable employment.
The juvenile court found the father was an unrehabilitated long-term drug user, failed to show meaningful steps to support or parent the child, the child had stability in foster care, and legitimation was not in the child’s best interests.

Issues

Issue	Father’s Argument	Mother/State’s Argument	Held
Whether juvenile court erred by denying legitimation under best-interest analysis	Father argued court relied on improper fitness-to-have-immediate-custody analysis; he sought only legitimation, not custody	Court and DFACS argued best-interest factors permit consideration of fitness, stability, and current placement when denying legitimation	Court held best-interest analysis under OCGA § 15-11-26 properly applied; denial affirmed
Whether court clearly erred in finding parenting classes were available in jail	Father contended no evidence showed classes were offered while incarcerated	Court relied on other supported findings even if that specific factual finding were discounted	Court found remaining findings supported denial; no reversible error
Whether father abandoned opportunity interest in relationship	Father claimed he did not abandon interest; DNA and visitation showed involvement after learning of paternity	Mother argued father failed to take steps to support child or complete case plan	Court found father did not abandon opportunity interest but legitimation still not in child’s best interests
Whether juvenile court abused discretion based on evidence of rehabilitation and ability to care for child	Father cited participation in classes in jail, intent to enter inpatient treatment after release, and weekly visits	Mother/guardian/DFACS pointed to long-term drug use, recent positive drug tests, arrests, incomplete case-plan tasks, lack of steady employment/support	Court concluded evidence supported findings of ongoing substance abuse, lack of stability, and that legitimation would harm child’s best interests; no abuse of discretion

Key Cases Cited

Binns v. Fairnot, 292 Ga. App. 336 (recognizes standard of review for legitimation petitions)
Neill v. Brannon, 320 Ga. App. 820 (reviews factual findings for clear error in legitimation context)
In the Interest of B. H.-W., 332 Ga. App. 269 (discusses abandonment inquiry and standards for legitimation vs best-interest/finality)
In the Interest of Baby Girl Eason, 257 Ga. 292 (legitimation principles acknowledging court may deny legitimation despite biological paternity)
In the Interest of M. K., 288 Ga. App. 71 (court must evaluate benefits and legal consequences of legitimation when assessing best interests)
In the Interest of C. L., 284 Ga. App. 674 (trial courts may deny legitimation based on child’s best interests even when paternity is established)