In the Term. of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.C. (Minor Child) and M.K. (Mother) v. The Ind. Dept. of Child Services (mem. dec.)
82A01-1607-JT-1683
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 21, 2016Background
- A.C. born Feb 2013; removed from mother’s custody one day after birth and placed in foster care due to concerns arising from medical/abuse findings related to older sibling A.G.
- Medical and forensic experts (in A.G. proceedings) concluded mother likely suffered from factitious disorder by proxy, posing life‑threatening risk to children; DCS opened CHINS proceedings for A.C.
- A.C. adjudicated CHINS after hearings in April 2013; dispositional plan required mother to engage in treatment and supervised visitation.
- Mother participated in therapy and monitored visits; reunification plan briefly approved in Feb 2014, but mother was later criminally convicted (Neglect of a Dependent) for conduct involving A.G. and sentenced to 10 years with one year suspended in July 2015.
- DCS petitioned to terminate mother’s parental rights to A.C. in Oct 2015; trial court terminated rights in June 2016, finding (among other things) ongoing risk to the child given mother’s diagnosis, interrupted therapy due to incarceration, lack of a parental plan upon release, and A.C.’s strong bond with foster mother.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DCS proved by clear and convincing evidence the statutory elements for involuntary termination (IC 31‑35‑2‑4[b][2]) | DCS: Historical conduct, medical findings, mother’s diagnosis, lack of completed therapy, incarceration, absence of viable plan, and child’s need for stability show continuation of the parent‑child relationship poses a threat and termination is in child’s best interest. | Mother: Termination impermissibly relies on incarceration; K.E. requires more than incarceration alone — mother argues no proof of a present continuing danger or inability to remedy conditions and she intends intra‑family adoption. | Court affirmed: Evidence (history, diagnosis, interrupted treatment, lack of plan, child’s bond with foster family) clearly and convincingly supports that continuation poses a threat and termination is in child’s best interest. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.G., 6 N.E.3d 952 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (medical/forensic findings on factitious disorder by proxy and risk to siblings established background facts)
- K.E. v. Indiana Dep’t of Child Servs., 39 N.E.3d 641 (Ind. 2015) (incarceration alone is insufficient for termination; release date is one factor among many)
- In re V.A., 51 N.E.3d 1140 (Ind. 2016) (standard of review for termination: consider evidence most favorable to judgment; do not reweigh)
- In re I.A., 934 N.E.2d 1127 (Ind. 2010) (appellate deference to trial court’s credibility determinations)
- Bester v. Lake Cty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (parental rights termination requires clear and convincing evidence)
- In re Adoption of O.R., 16 N.E.3d 965 (Ind. 2014) (parental rights are constitutionally protected but may be terminated when parents cannot meet responsibilities)