In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.K. (Minor Child) and T.K. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
28A01-1708-JT-2072
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 29, 2017Background
- A.K. was born Jan 1, 2015; both parents used meth during pregnancy and A.K. tested positive for meth; DCS removed A.K. four days after birth and placed her with foster parents and three half-brothers.
- Father (T.K.) had a long history of meth abuse, unstable housing and employment, sporadic visitation, and criminal conduct culminating in a 2015 burglary conviction and incarceration; he fled to avoid arrest for several months, then was jailed during much of the proceedings.
- CHINS adjudication occurred in Feb 2015; dispositional order required Father to maintain housing/employment, complete substance-abuse treatment, submit to drug screens, and attend visitation; Father partially complied pre-incarceration and provided no documentation of prison treatment completions.
- DCS changed permanency plan to termination and adoption in Sept 2016; foster family planned to adopt all four children; CASA and caseworkers testified that the children are bonded to each other and the foster family and would be harmed by removal.
- Trial court terminated Father’s parental rights in July 2017; Father appealed, arguing insufficient evidence that (1) conditions leading to removal would not be remedied and (2) termination was in A.K.’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | DCS’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence shows a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied | Father: He is now sober and completed substance-abuse and parenting programs in prison; incarceration limited his ability to participate | DCS: Father had decade-long meth use, criminality, unstable housing/employment, sporadic pre-incarceration participation, fled to avoid arrest, and provided no documentation of prison program completion | Court: Affirmed — evidence and findings support reasonable probability conditions will not be remedied |
| Whether termination is in the child’s best interests | Father: Incarceration impeded contact; possible early release and prison programs favor reunification | DCS: Totality of circumstances (bonding with foster family/siblings, lack of parent-child bond, long instability) favors adoption for child’s permanency | Court: Affirmed — termination is in A.K.’s best interests |
| Whether incarceration alone justifies termination | Father: Termination impermissibly based on incarceration | DCS: Not relying solely on incarceration; cited history and lack of contact/services | Court: Affirmed — court did not rely solely on incarceration; considered totality of circumstances |
| Whether undocumented prison coursework should weigh in Father’s favor | Father: Completed programs in DOC and Inside/Out Dads | DCS: No documentation or witnesses to verify completion; court cannot credit unproven claims | Court: Affirmed — lack of documentation and credibility choices support rejecting the claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Bester v. Lake Cty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (parental rights are fundamental but may be terminated when parents cannot meet responsibilities)
- In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (standard of review for termination findings)
- In re K.T.K., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 2013) (clear-and-convincing standard and threat to child’s development supports termination)
- In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (incarcerated parent’s documented prison efforts and maintained contact can weigh against termination)
- In re Adoption of O.R., 16 N.E.3d 965 (Ind. 2014) (distinguishing incarcerated parents who lack an established relationship or communication with the child)
- K.E. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 39 N.E.3d 641 (Ind. 2015) (incarceration alone insufficient to justify termination)
- In re A.K., 924 N.E.2d 212 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (service provider testimony may support best-interests finding)
- In re A.I., 825 N.E.2d 798 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (court should consider initial removal reasons and bases for continued placement)
- In re J.T., 742 N.E.2d 509 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (judge parent fitness at time of termination while considering changed conditions and habitual conduct)
- McBride v. Monroe Cty. Office of Family & Children, 798 N.E.2d 185 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (factors to consider include substance abuse, criminal history, employment, housing, neglect, and support)