In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of N.G. (Minor Child), and N.R.G. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services
2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 364
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- N.G., born ~2009, was removed from Mother’s care in January 2013 after an alleged physical abuse incident involving Father; DWS (older brother) was also removed and designated CHINS earlier.
- The trial court adjudicated N.G. a CHINS and ordered services with a reunification goal.
- DCS filed a petition to terminate Mother’s parental rights in July 2014 after N.G. had been out of the home for 15 of the most recent 22 months.
- Prior to the final hearing, N.G. lived with an aunt then was placed in a pre-adoptive foster home when the aunt could no longer care for her; N.G. made disclosures of sexual abuse in October 2013.
- The trial court issued a one-page termination order in January 2016 terminating Mother’s parental rights, finding (among other things) Mother stopped complying with the dispositional decree, that Mother’s trauma impaired reunification, that continuation of the relationship would threaten the child, and that adoption was a satisfactory plan.
- Mother appealed, arguing the trial court’s findings of fact were insufficient under Ind. Code § 31-35-2-8(c); the Court of Appeals remanded for proper findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court entered adequate findings of fact to support statutory requirements for termination under Ind. Code § 31-35-2-4 and § 31-35-2-8(c) | Mother: findings are sparse, mostly recitations of testimony, and do not support conclusions (best interests, threat, remedial probability, satisfactory plan) | DCS: (implicit) record supports termination; the court’s conclusions are sufficient | Court: Findings are deficient and too sparse; remand for proper, fact-specific findings and conclusions to support termination |
| Whether the court identified facts supporting that continuation of the parent-child relationship posed a threat to the child | Mother: court did not adopt or substantiate child’s disclosures and provided no factual link to threat | DCS: (implicit) child disclosures and Mother’s noncompliance/trauma justify threat finding | Court: The order merely recited the child’s disclosure without adopting or substantiating it; insufficient to show threat |
| Whether the court supported its best-interest conclusion with factual findings | Mother: no supporting facts given beyond supervised therapeutic visits | DCS: (implicit) child’s progress in foster care supports best interest | Court: Order lacks factual findings demonstrating why termination is in child’s best interests; insufficient |
| Whether the court adequately described the satisfactory plan for the child (adoption) | Mother: order gives minimal support (one-line about progress with foster parents) and lacks duration/stability facts | DCS: (implicit) adoption plan by foster parents is satisfactory based on child progress | Court: Findings insufficient; should indicate relevant facts (e.g., length and stability in foster placement) |
Key Cases Cited
- In re K.T.K., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 2013) (clear-and-convincing standard for termination; emotional and physical development threatened by continued custody)
- Bester v. Lake Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (appellate review standard and seriousness of termination proceedings)
- In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (review requires determining whether evidence supports findings and whether findings support judgment)
- Parks v. Delaware Cnty. Dep’t of Child Servs., 862 N.E.2d 1275 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (findings that merely recite testimony without adoption are inadequate; trial court must enter fact-based findings)