In the Interest of: W.E.A.O., a Minor
3021 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jan 31, 2017Background
- Child removed from Mother three days after birth (May 2015) due to deplorable home conditions; child adjudicated dependent in June 2015.
- CYS prepared a Family Service Plan requiring safe/clean housing, parenting classes, mental health evaluations, attendance at medical appointments, and regular visits.
- Mother completed some services (parenting course, mental health evaluation) but did not complete a court-ordered developmental disability mental health evaluation.
- Mother’s visitation declined over time: attended 48 of 73 scheduled visits; last visit before hearing was April 2016; CYS reduced visits because of Mother’s requests and sporadic attendance.
- Mother lacked stable, inspectable housing at time petition was filed; housing only obtained after petition/notice and not yet inspected by CYS.
- Trial court found Mother failed to perform parental duties over the relevant period; CYS foster home was meeting the child’s needs. Trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights (23 Pa.C.S. §2511); Mother appealed. Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | CYS / Trial Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether clear & convincing evidence showed Mother refused or failed to perform parental duties under §2511(a)(1) | Mother argued she engaged with services: completed parenting program, attended visits, tried to resolve housing, and obtained housing before the hearing | Caseworkers testified Mother missed many visits, declined visit time, did not attend child’s medical appointments, failed to complete required mental-health disability evaluation, and obtained housing only after petition | Court held §2511(a)(1) satisfied: Mother failed to perform parental duties during the relevant period and showed no settled effort to maintain parental role |
| Whether Mother can or will remedy conditions causing removal (§2511(a) remedies / timing) | Mother contended she addressed issues (housing, services) and was improving | Court noted many remedial steps occurred only after notice/petition; housing uninspected and parenting skills not consistently applied | Court concluded Mother could not be expected to remedy conditions within a reasonable time (affirmed on §2511(a)(1); no need to separately decide other subsections) |
| Whether termination serves child’s needs and welfare under §2511(b) | Mother did not present a §2511(b) challenge | CYS pointed to child’s placement in a stable pre-adoptive home and lack of an established parent-child bond | Court held termination met child’s best interests: no evidence of a parent-child bond and child benefits from permanency in foster home |
Key Cases Cited
- In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) (bifurcated §2511 analysis and importance of child’s need for timely permanency)
- In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505 (Pa. Super. 2007) (summary of §2511 framework)
- In re Adoption of Charles E.D.M., 708 A.2d 88 (Pa. 1998) (§2511(a)(1) may be satisfied by either settled purpose to relinquish or failure to perform parental duties)
- In re B.,N.M., 856 A.2d 847 (Pa. Super. 2004) (parental duties defined as affirmative obligations beyond financial support)
- In re K.Z.S., 946 A.2d 753 (Pa. Super. 2008) (where no evidence of bond exists, court may infer absence of bond for §2511(b) analysis)