In the Term. of the Parent-Child Relationship of: P.J.H. & J.H. (Minor Children) and P.H. (Father) v. The Ind. Dept. of Child Services (mem. dec.), 11A04-1606-JT-1224

Father (P.H.) and Mother lived together with two children (P.J.H., age 8; J.H., age 7) and other children in 2013; law enforcement found a meth lab in the garage and marijuana in the home. DCS removed the children and filed CHINS petitions.
Juvenile court adjudicated the children CHINS in June 2013 and ordered reunification services; Father sporadically participated in visits, missed drug screens, and failed to engage in services and treatment.
Children returned briefly on a home trial in 2014; P.J.H. was discharged from CHINS then refilled in Jan. 2015 after Mother tested positive for methamphetamine. Father and Mother admitted allegations in the 2015 petition.
DCS sought to cease reunification services due to parents’ noncompliance (Father’s missed screens, substance issues, incarceration, and limited parenting engagement); permanency plan amended to adoption and a termination petition was filed.
Evidence at the termination hearing: case manager and CASA recommended termination; findings included Father’s cognitive limitations, prior convictions for controlled substances, incarceration, failure to meet case-plan obligations, children’s trauma and improved health in foster care, and foster family’s willingness to adopt.
Juvenile court terminated Father’s parental rights; Father appealed arguing termination was not supported by clear and convincing evidence, particularly contesting consideration of his mental-health/cognitive issues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (DCS)	Defendant's Argument (Father)	Held
Whether termination was supported by clear and convincing evidence that conditions leading to removal will not be remedied and termination is in children’s best interests	DCS: Parents failed to remedy conditions (substance abuse, noncompliance, incarceration, cognitive limitations); children are thriving in foster care and need permanency	Father: Court erred by relying on his mental-health/cognitive disability as a basis for termination; disability alone is not a proper ground	Court: Affirmed — evidence (including recommendations, noncompliance, children’s trauma, and permanency needs) supports termination; mental disability considered only insofar as it rendered Father unable to parent

In re K.W., 12 N.E.3d 241 (Ind. 2014) (termination is a last resort; statutory framework for proving termination)
In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (State must prove termination elements by clear and convincing evidence)
A.D.S. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 987 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (case manager and CASA recommendations plus evidence of unremedied conditions can satisfy best-interests proof)
In re V.A., 51 N.E.3d 1140 (Ind. 2016) (parental mental disability alone is not a proper ground for termination)
Egly v. Blackford Cnty. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 592 N.E.2d 1232 (Ind. 1992) (mental disability may be considered when it renders a parent incapable of fulfilling parental obligations)