In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of M.W. (Child) and E.W. (Mother) E.W. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 23A04-1611-JT-2517

Child born April 4, 2015; tested positive for opiates and exhibited neonatal withdrawal; Mother admitted prenatal heroin use.
DCS opened an in‑home CHINS case; dispositional order required substance‑abuse treatment, IOP, random drug screens, Homebuilders, supervised visits, and case management.
Mother and her boyfriend initially complied but relapsed (positive amphetamine/methamphetamine screens in July 2015); Child removed and placed in foster/relative care August–September 2015.
Mother had repeated, unsuccessful attempts at rehabilitation (including discharge from inpatient program), ongoing instability in housing and employment, continued relationship with boyfriend who was a relapse risk, and inconsistent engagement with services.
Court changed permanency plan to adoption (March–May 2016); DCS petitioned to terminate Mother’s parental rights (July 2016).
After evidentiary hearing, the trial court found clear and convincing evidence that the conditions leading to removal (primarily Mother’s substance abuse and unstable housing/employment, compounded by her relationship with boyfriend) would not be remedied, and that termination was in the child’s best interest; appeals court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mother)	Defendant's Argument (DCS)	Held
Whether there is a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied	Mother argued she maintained visitation, sought treatment, had housing/employment/transportation, and was bonded to the child	DCS argued Mother repeatedly relapsed, failed to complete programs, lacked stable housing/employment, and remained with a relapse‑prone boyfriend	Court held evidence supported a reasonable probability conditions would not be remedied; affirmed termination
Whether termination is in the child’s best interest	Mother relied on bonding and ongoing visitation	DCS pointed to child’s medical needs, stable relative placement, and failure of mother to attain stability	Court found termination was in child’s best interest and relative placement provided a permanent plan
Whether additional services would likely remedy problems	Mother suggested more services and continued participation could achieve reunification	DCS maintained extensive services had been exhausted without long‑term effect	Court found additional services would not be beneficial and mother had not sustained progress
Standard of review and sufficiency of evidence	Mother requested reversal based on insufficiency	DCS relied on the trial court’s factual findings supported by clear and convincing evidence	Court applied deferential review to factual findings and concluded judgment was not clearly erroneous

In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (standards for termination and burden of proof)
In re N.G., 51 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. 2016) (statutory requirements for termination petitions)
In re K.S., D.S., & B.G., 750 N.E.2d 832 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (deference in termination appeals)
In re D.D., 804 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (do not reweigh evidence or judge credibility on appeal)
In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (two‑tiered standard of review for termination findings)
Smith v. Miller Builders, Inc., 741 N.E.2d 731 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (unchallenged findings control appellate review)
In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (grounds for setting aside termination judgment)
In re D.W., 969 N.E.2d 89 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (failure to use services and continued drug use supports conclusion conditions won’t be remedied)