In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.D. & J.D. (Children) and N.D. (Mother) N.D. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 49A02-1611-JT-2466

Background

Mother (N.D.) diagnosed with schizophrenia and PTSD; children C.D. (born 2014) and J.D. (born 2015) were removed by DCS and placed in foster care after concerns about homelessness, missed treatment, a mark on C.D., and Mother’s inconsistent engagement with services.
Court adjudicated C.D. and J.D. CHINS; parental participation orders required Mother to engage in home-based services, mental health treatment, domestic-violence programs, and supervised parenting time.
Mother repeatedly cancelled or shortened supervised visits, attended few visits in 2016, and declined full cooperation with service providers; she also made and then recanted unsubstantiated allegations of sexual abuse against her own mother (Grandmother).
Mother moved back into Grandmother’s home in May 2016; DCS changed permanency plan to adoption in April 2016 and filed to terminate Mother’s parental rights in May 2016.
Trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that continuation of the parent-child relationship posed a threat to the children’s well-being (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(ii)) and terminated Mother’s parental rights; Mother appealed arguing insufficient evidence.

Issues

Issue	Mother’s Argument	DCS’s Argument	Held
Whether continuation of the parent-child relationship posed a threat to the children’s well-being under IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(ii)	Mother argued evidence did not show lack of parenting skills or a threat to children’s safety	DCS argued Mother’s inconsistent visitation, failure to remediate mental-health and domestic-violence issues, and unstable relationship with Grandmother endangered the children	Court affirmed: clear-and-convincing evidence supported finding that continuation posed a threat
Whether statutory prerequisites for termination were satisfied (removal period, best interests, plan)	Mother did not meaningfully challenge these on appeal (waived)	DCS relied on existing dispositional history, permanency findings, and adoptive placement plan	Court treated these elements as supported and not meaningfully contested; affirmed termination
Whether the trial court improperly weighed evidence or credibility	Mother contended findings not supported and evidence of some positive parenting undermined termination	DCS pointed to overall regression, missed visits, safety concerns, and failure to complete services	Court declined to reweigh credibility; reviewed in favor of trial court and found findings supported
Whether reunification efforts were adequate or termination premature	Mother argued she showed some positive attributes and could parent with services	DCS argued extensive efforts had been made and Mother failed to engage sufficiently over the case’s duration	Court found DCS made extensive efforts and Mother’s limited engagement justified termination

Key Cases Cited

In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (Fourteenth Amendment parental-rights standard; State must prove termination elements by clear and convincing evidence)
In re N.G., 51 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. 2016) (requirements for termination petition and proof standard)
In re K.S., D.S., & B.G., 750 N.E.2d 832 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (deference in review of termination orders)
In re D.D., 804 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (do not reweigh evidence or judge witness credibility on appeal)
In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (two-tiered standard of review for termination findings and conclusions)
Smith v. Miller Builders, Inc., 741 N.E.2d 731 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (if appellant does not challenge findings, appellate review looks to findings to support judgment)
In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (only one disjunctive subsection of IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2) need be proved)
In re D.J. v. Indiana Dep’t of Child Servs., 68 N.E.3d 574 (Ind. 2017) (appellate courts should not reweigh credibility or evidence)