In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.P., B.P., and R.P. (Children), and, D.P. (Mother) and R.P. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
15A01-1704-JT-901
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 31, 2017Background
- Mother (D.P.) had three children: R.P. (2010), B.P. (2013), and K.P. (2014). Father (R.P.) is biological father of R.P. and B.P.; Stepfather is father of K.P.
- DCS filed CHINS petition after Stepfather overdosed on heroin in the children’s presence; CHINS allegations targeted Mother and Stepfather, not Father. Children were eventually removed from Mother and placed with the paternal aunt.
- Mother repeatedly tested positive for illegal or unprescribed drugs, missed drug screens and treatment, incurred drug-related arrests, and was jailed for periods during the case; she was held in contempt for noncompliance and had only belatedly enrolled in treatment.
- Father initially complied with CHINS proceedings and visited regularly, but a decade-old allegation led to a child-molesting conviction (Class C felony), probation with a no-contact condition toward persons under 16, probation violations, and incarceration; he was transferred to a DOC facility that lacked sex-offender treatment.
- DCS petitioned to terminate Mother’s parental rights to all three children and Father’s rights to R.P. and B.P.; the trial court terminated both parents’ rights to R.P. and B.P. and Mother’s rights to K.P.; the aunt planned to adopt and was open to possible future contact between the children and parents.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sufficient evidence supported termination of Mother’s parental rights | Mother’s substance abuse, repeated noncompliance with treatment, arrests, and instability pose a continuing threat and make termination in children’s best interests | Mother argued she had begun treatment and expressed desire to change; improvements should be considered | Held: Termination of Mother’s parental rights affirmed — clear and convincing evidence that continuation posed a threat and termination was in children’s best interests |
| Whether sufficient evidence supported termination of Father’s parental rights | Father’s child-molesting conviction, probation no-contact condition, probation violations and incarceration justify finding that continuation posed a threat and that reunification was not feasible | Father argued (1) CHINS never alleged misconduct by him, (2) conviction predated children’s births and victim wasn’t his child, (3) limited opportunities were provided for rehabilitation (no available sex-offender program at his DOC facility), and (4) aunt’s adoption would preserve children’s stability | Held: Termination of Father’s parental rights reversed — DCS failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that continuation posed a threat; insufficient efforts/services provided and conviction circumstances did not mandate termination |
Key Cases Cited
- In re I.A., 934 N.E.2d 1127 (Ind. 2010) (parental liberty interest and standard of review for termination proceedings)
- Bester v. Lake Cty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (consider parent’s habitual pattern of conduct and current fitness when assessing threat to child)
- In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (prior criminal history predating a child’s conception by itself may be insufficient to support termination)