In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: Ic.G. and Ib.G. (Minor Children) and M.G. (Mother) and B.G. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
54A04-1608-JT-1989
| Ind. Ct. App. | Mar 2, 2017Background
- Two children (born 2008 and 2010) were removed from Mother (M.G.) and Father (B.G.) after a 2014 DCS home visit revealing drugs, paraphernalia, unsanitary conditions, and parental arrests; children were adjudicated CHINS.
- Parents were ordered to complete substance-abuse treatment, therapy, drug screens, case management, and supervised visitation; both had repeated incarcerations that interrupted services and visitation.
- Mother engaged in treatment intermittently, admitted relapses (Tramadol, methamphetamine), missed/cancelled therapy appointments, maintained employment but lacked stable independent housing, and continued drug use shortly before the termination hearing.
- Father participated inconsistently in services, had sporadic positive drug screens, missed some screens, and was incarcerated again in April 2015 with earliest release in 2021 (possible time reductions via programs); he maintained contact when possible.
- Children displayed behavioral disorders (Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder; Conduct Disorder), improved with foster family care, and DCS filed petitions to terminate parental rights in January 2016; the trial court granted termination in August 2016.
Issues
| Issue | Mother's Argument | Father's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility/weight of drug-screen evidence | Trial court erred by relying on drug-screen findings that DCS did not formally admit and that FCM was unqualified to testify about | Not raised specifically | Court found some findings were based on inadmissible evidence but error was harmless because mother and multiple clinicians (without objection) admitted drug use and relapse; conclusion supported. |
| Whether conditions leading to removal will be remedied | Mother argued she had employment, attended treatment, and intended to remedy addiction and housing | DCS argued ongoing substance abuse, unstable housing, and habitual conduct made remediation unlikely | Court held reasonable probability conditions (substance abuse, unsafe housing) would not be remedied given continued recent use and instability. |
| Best interests of the children | Mother argued stable visits, employment, and willingness to improve supported reunification | DCS and foster evidence showed children needed stable, drug-free adoptive home; CASA and FCM recommended termination | Court held termination was in children's best interests given parental instability and children's progress in foster care. |
| Satisfactory plan for care (Father) | Father implied relatives might care for children; challenged sufficiency of plan | DCS planned adoption with foster family and was evaluating relatives | Court held adoption by foster family constituted a satisfactory plan and supported termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- K.T.K. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 2013) (standard of review and burdens in parental-termination appeals)
- Bester v. Lake Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (trial court must weigh habitual patterns and current fitness when assessing remedy of removal conditions)
- In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (two-step analysis for identifying removal conditions and assessing probability they will not be remedied)
- In re B.M., 913 N.E.2d 1283 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (adoption is a satisfactory plan under termination statute)