In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.D.S. & A.S. and L.S. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 211
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Mother L.S. is biological mother of A.D.S. (b. 2007) and A.S. (b. 2009); CHINS petitions filed due to unsafe home environment and mother's substance abuse.
- A.D.S. and A.S. were removed from Mother’s care after CHINS adjudications; A.S. was removed first, with delayed reunification attempts.
- Mother tested positive for cocaine during 2010–2011; she participated in various treatments but repeatedly relapsed and missed screens.
- The Children have resided since October 2011 with current pre-adoptive caregivers, who report the children thriving and bonded.
- A January 2012 petition sought termination; a June 2012 evidentiary hearing led to termination of parental rights.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, applying a two-step standard: first, whether evidence supports the trial court’s findings; second, whether findings support termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remedy of conditions (B)(2)(B)(i) sufficient? | MCDCS argues there is a reasonable probability conditions will not be remedied. | Mother argues sobriety and stability exist; conditions could be remedied. | Yes; clear and convincing evidence shows condition non-remediation. |
| Best interests justify termination? | MCDCS contends termination serves the children’s best interests given lack of permanency and improvements in current home. | Mother argues termination not in children’s best interests. | Yes; totality of evidence supports termination as in the children’s best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (clear and convincing standard applied in termination; best interests analysis)
- In re J.H., 911 N.E.2d 69 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (two-tier review of findings and judgment in termination)
- In re C.G., 954 N.E.2d 910 (Ind. 2011) (14th Amendment; subordinate parental interests in termination)
- In re D.D., 804 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (court defers to trial court findings; not reweighing evidence)
- In re Kay L., 867 N.E.2d 236 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (probability parent’s behavior will not change may satisfy remedying conditions)
- L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (two-tiered standard; focus on sufficiency of findings)