In the Interest of J.V.F., a Minor
In the Interest of J.V.F., a Minor No. 424 EDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Aug 25, 2017Background
- Child born Oct. 2014; father deceased. DHS removed Child in 2015 due to Mother’s substance abuse, mental-health issues, and housing; Child placed with paternal grandmother in June 2015.
- Single Case Plan (SCP) goals for Mother included drug/alcohol assessment and treatment, mental-health treatment, parenting classes, sobriety, and stable housing; Mother frequently failed to comply.
- Mother had multiple positive drug tests during the case (including Dec. 12, 2016) and missed random drug screens and treatment reassessments; she completed only 4 of 12 parenting sessions and did not provide documentation of treatment completion.
- DHS filed petitions on Dec. 9, 2016 to terminate Mother’s parental rights and change the permanency goal to adoption; trial court heard the matter Jan. 17, 2017 and entered decree terminating parental rights and changing the goal to adoption.
- Trial court found Mother failed to perform parental duties for the statutory period, Child was strongly bonded to paternal grandmother (calling her “mom”), Child was thriving in that placement, and termination and adoption best served Child’s needs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DHS) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS met its burden to involuntarily terminate Mother’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1) | Mother refused/failed to perform parental duties for the six months before petition filing due to ongoing substance abuse and noncompliance with SCP | Mother asserted she completed chemical-dependency treatment, was enrolled in a 30‑day program, and completed parenting class(es) | Court affirmed termination under § 2511(a)(1): record shows continued substance use, missed screens and treatment noncompliance during critical period |
| Whether termination is in Child’s best interests under § 2511(b) | Termination serves Child’s developmental, physical, and emotional needs because Child is bonded to foster mother and flourishing; no irreparable harm from termination | Mother argued goal change/termination not in Child’s best interests given her treatment efforts | Court held termination meets § 2511(b): primary bond is with paternal grandmother, Child doing extremely well, and termination would not cause irreparable harm |
| Whether changing permanency goal to adoption was appropriate | Child had been in placement over 17 months, was well-adjusted to paternal grandmother, and Mother failed SCP goals; changing goal prioritizes Child’s permanency | Mother argued she made progress (treatment enrollment, prior program completion, parenting classes) | Court affirmed goal change to adoption as not an abuse of discretion: focus is Child’s safety, permanency, well‑being and record supported change |
Key Cases Cited
- In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) (standard of review and deference to trial court credibility determinations in termination cases)
- In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505 (Pa. Super. 2007) (affirmance requirement when competent evidence supports termination)
- In re R.N.J., 985 A.2d 273 (Pa. Super. 2009) (clear and convincing evidence burden in termination proceedings)
- In re J.L.C., 837 A.2d 1247 (Pa. Super. 2003) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- In re D.J.S., 737 A.2d 283 (Pa. Super. 1999) (§ 2511(a)(1) may be satisfied by failure to perform parental duties or settled purpose to relinquish)
- Matter of Adoption of Charles E.D.M., II, 708 A.2d 88 (Pa. 1998) (interpretation of parental duty/settled purpose inquiry)
- In re B.L.W., 843 A.2d 380 (Pa. Super. 2004) (court need only agree with one subsection of § 2511(a) to affirm)
- In re C.M.S., 832 A.2d 457 (Pa. Super. 2003) (parent must exert sincere effort and use available resources to preserve parent-child relationship)
- In re J.W., 578 A.2d 952 (Pa. Super. 1990) (parental bonds that are form not substance may be terminated when preserving them consigns child to unstable future)
- In re S.B., 943 A.2d 973 (Pa. Super. 2008) (standard of review and child-focused analysis for goal changes)
- In re N.C., 909 A.2d 818 (Pa. Super. 2006) (a child’s life cannot be put on hold pending parental improvement; focus on child’s best interests)