In the Interest of R. E. Et Al., Children
333 Ga. App. 53
Ga. Ct. App.2015Background
- Four children (two older R.E. and M.C.; two younger L.P. and J.P.) were removed after disclosures of possible sexual contact among household members and unsanitary home conditions; DFCS placed children in custody and opened a case plan.
- Mother lived with R.S. (father of the two younger children); two older children have a different father (R.E. Sr.). Allegations included sexual abuse, witnessing adults having sex, and neglectful housing conditions.
- Investigations produced inconsistent and changing statements from young children; law enforcement did not pursue criminal charges due to lack of reliable evidence.
- Juvenile court found the children deprived (based on reports of sexual activity in the home and deplorable home conditions) and later terminated parental rights of the mother and both fathers.
- On appeal the mother argued termination lacked clear and convincing evidence of current deprivation or likelihood the cause of any deprivation would continue; appellate court reviewed whether any rational factfinder could so find.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (DFCS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether clear and convincing evidence showed children were currently deprived at time of termination hearing | Earlier deprivation findings persisted; mother’s lifestyle and home conditions continue to harm children | Children remain deprived due to parents’ lifestyle, unstable housing, employment, and failure to complete case plan | Reversed — evidence did not clearly and convincingly show current deprivation |
| Whether mother’s "polyamorous" relationship/lifestyle justified termination | Mother: relationship alone does not demonstrate harm or inability to parent | DFCS: parents’ sexual lifestyle harmed children and supported deprivation finding | Reversed — no evidence children were exposed to or harmed by parents’ sexual practices |
| Whether mother’s housing and employment were unstable enough to warrant termination | Mother: purchased mobile home, completed major repairs, took part-time jobs to comply with case plan; poverty alone insufficient | DFCS: housing remained unstable and mother lacked stable income | Reversed — evidence did not clearly and convincingly show unstable housing/employment justifying termination |
| Whether mother failed to complete case plan and remedy causes of deprivation | Mother: completed parenting classes, parent aide, psychological evaluation, ongoing counseling, regular visits; substantially complied | DFCS: mother fell short of reunification goals and stood by R.S. | Reversed — mother substantially completed major case-plan goals and no proof cause of deprivation likely to continue |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Interest of C. M., 325 Ga. App. 869 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014) (standard of review on termination appeal; deference to juvenile court findings)
- In the Interest of B. W., 325 Ga. App. 899 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014) (noncustodial-parent deprivation must be shown as of hearing — conditions supporting earlier deprivation must persist)
- In the Interest of C. J. V., 323 Ga. App. 283 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013) (termination is remedy of last resort; findings must be supported by clear and convincing evidence)
- In the Interest of G. R. B., 330 Ga. App. 693 (Ga. Ct. App. 2015) (parental conduct not shown to have harmed child is insufficient to support deprivation finding)
- In the Interest of J. V. J., 329 Ga. App. 421 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014) (cohabitation or a parent’s relationship alone is insufficient to terminate parental rights absent evidence it will negatively affect child)