In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of L.R. (Minor Child) and T.S. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
29A02-1704-JT-846
| Ind. Ct. App. | Aug 28, 2017Background
- Child L.R. born Jan 16, 2014; Mother imprisoned for burglary while pregnant; Father and Child move to Indiana.
- DCS substantiates abuse by Father; CHINS petition filed Dec 30, 2014; Mother initially incarcerated.
- Mother released to parole, previously unable to leave California; interstate placement sought and denied due to extensive criminal history.
- Mother completes parenting assessment; recommended weekly video calls; Mother participates inconsistently; visitation issues persist.
- Permanency hearing (June 3, 2016) ends services; plan changed to termination and adoption; Mother later pursues visitation but misses hearing.
- DCS files termination July 13, 2016; December 27, 2016 permanency hearing; child nearly three; Child thriving with pre-adoptive foster parents; GAL and two FCMs recommend termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there sufficient evidence that termination was in the child’s best interests? | Mother argues insufficiency of evidence. | DCS maintains clear and convincing evidence supports best interests. | Yes; termination supported by clear and convincing evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lang v. Starke Cty. Office of Family & Children, 861 N.E.2d 366 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (absence of consistent visitation shows lack of commitment to parent–child relation)
- In re I.A., 934 N.E.2d 1127 (Ind. 2010) (two-tier review for termination messages; weigh evidence in favor of child)
- McBride v. Monroe Cty. Office of Family & Children, 798 N.E.2d 185 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (best interests analysis requires subordinating parental interests to child’s)
- Bogner v. Bogner, 29 N.E.3d 733 (Ind. 2015) (harmless error for unpreserved evidence; cumulation considered)
- Witte v. Mundy ex rel. Mundy, 820 N.E.2d 128 (Ind. 2005) (harmless error doctrine and evidentiary review)
- The Indiana case cited as McBride; others referenced in opinion, (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) () (supports standard for sufficiency and best interests)