In The Interest of: K.F.M.R., a Minor, In The Interest of: K.F.M.R., a Minor No. 1979 EDA 2016

Child born Feb 2011; DHS removed Child in Jan 2012 after hospitalization and concerns about Mother and Father’s care; Child placed in foster care and adjudicated dependent.
DHS filed a petition to involuntarily terminate Mother’s parental rights on July 3, 2013; hearing occurred May 26, 2016 after multiple continuances.
Mother had a history of substance abuse, unstable housing, mental health problems, and criminal convictions; she was incarcerated from Oct 2014 to Dec 2015.
Mother completed some evaluations and attended visitation, but failed repeatedly to maintain stable housing, sustained sobriety, or address key recommendations from a parenting capacity evaluation.
Expert (Dr. Russell) and caseworker (Ms. Moody) testified Mother’s issues (substance use, mental health, housing, insufficient legal income) persisted and rendered her unable to provide a safe, stable home.
Trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1),(2),(5),(8) and (b); on appeal the court analyzed and affirmed termination under § 2511(a)(2) and denied a requested continuance.

Issue	Mother's Argument	DHS/Trial Court Argument	Held
Whether DHS failed to prove grounds for termination under § 2511(a)(2)	Mother: was in full compliance with SCP at a Jan 2016 review except for housing; court improperly downgraded compliance and relied on lack of documentary proof	DHS: Mother had long-standing, repeated incapacity (substance use, mental health, unstable housing) causing Child to lack essential parental care; causes not remedied	Affirmed: § 2511(a)(2) satisfied — repeated/continued incapacity caused lack of essential parental care and was not remedied
Whether trial court abused discretion by denying continuance request	Mother: new counsel appointed Jan 2016 had not met her; continuance needed to gather documentation and prepare	DHS/Trial Court: case had been continued many times since 2013; Mother/counsel had months to prepare and Mother failed to cooperate with counsel	Affirmed: denial of continuance not an abuse of discretion given delay history and Mother’s lack of justification

In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) (standard of appellate review in termination cases; deference to trial court findings)
In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505 (Pa. Super. 2007) (bifurcated analysis under § 2511: parent conduct then child best interests)
In re B.L.W., 843 A.2d 380 (Pa. Super. 2004) (agreement with any one subsection of § 2511(a) suffices to affirm)
In re Adoption of M.E.P., 825 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Super. 2003) (elements required to terminate under § 2511(a)(2))
In re A.L.D., 797 A.2d 326 (Pa. Super. 2002) (parental incapacity can include refusal or incapacity, not only affirmative misconduct)
In re Adoption of R.J.S., 901 A.2d 502 (Pa. Super. 2006) (child’s need for permanence outweighs indefinite delay for parental improvement)
In re J.K., 825 A.2d 1277 (Pa. Super. 2003) (trial court has broad discretion to grant or deny continuances)