In the Matter of: J.A.W.S., a Minor
In the Matter of: J.A.W.S., a Minor No. 66 MDA 2017
Pa. Super. Ct.Jul 3, 2017Background
- Child J.W.-S. born December 2014; placed in kinship foster care with maternal grandmother (G.H.) on December 17, 2014 and has remained there since.
- Mother (J.S.) has a long history of substance abuse, multiple convictions, and repeated incarcerations beginning before and continuing after Child’s birth.
- Agency provided a Family Service Plan: drug/alcohol treatment, urine screens, parenting classes, regular contact; Mother failed to document completion of programs, repeatedly tested positive, absconded from inpatient treatment, and was re-incarcerated multiple times.
- Child has never lived with Mother and is strongly bonded to her foster mother (G.H.), who has already adopted Child’s sibling and is an adoptive resource for Child.
- Agency filed a petition (Oct. 3, 2016) to change the permanency goal to adoption and to involuntarily terminate Mother’s parental rights; Orphans’ Court held hearings on Dec. 13, 2016 and entered orders on Dec. 14, 2016.
- Mother appealed; counsel filed an Anders brief and motion to withdraw; Superior Court conducted independent review and affirmed the goal change and termination, granting counsel’s withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | Agency/State Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court abused its discretion by changing Child’s permanency goal from reunification to adoption | Mother challenges goal change (generally contends error) | Child’s need for permanency, Mother’s failure to remedy removal causes (drug use, incarceration), Child bonded to foster mother; goal change serves Child’s best interests | Goal change to adoption affirmed — record supports lack of progress, Child’s bond with foster mother, and Child’s need for permanence |
| Whether the court abused its discretion by involuntarily terminating Mother’s parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a) and (b) | Mother contends termination was improper (implicitly challenges sufficiency/best interests) | Agency proved by clear and convincing evidence under §§ 2511(a)(1),(2),(5),(8) that conditions persisted, Mother failed to remedy, and termination serves Child’s developmental, physical and emotional needs | Termination affirmed — trial court’s factual findings supported; Mother’s relapse, treatment noncompliance, and absence warranted termination; no detrimental bond shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedure for counsel withdrawal when appeal is frivolous)
- In re R.J.T., 9 A.3d 1179 (Pa. Super. 2010) (standard of review in dependency/goal-change matters; appellate deference to factfinder)
- In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) (standard of review and deference in termination decisions)
- In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505 (Pa. Super. 2007) (bifurcated analysis under 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511: parental conduct then child’s needs and welfare)
- In re Adoption of S.P., 47 A.3d 817 (Pa. 2012) (incarceration is a relevant factor — may support findings under § 2511(a)(2) depending on circumstances)
- In re LJ., 972 A.2d 5 (Pa. Super. 2009) (a child’s need for permanence cannot be subordinated indefinitely to a parent’s progress)