In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: C.D. (Minor Child) and M.D. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 82A05-1610-JT-2458

Background

Child born May 26, 2014, with positive meconium/drug screen for THC and methadone; Mother admitted opiate addiction and ongoing methadone treatment.
DCS filed CHINS petition July 2014 after Mother tested positive for methamphetamine; Mother stipulated and received a parental participation plan (treatment, random screens, supervised visits).
Mother had intermittent compliance, multiple removals and returns of Child to her care, arrests, episodes of apparent intoxication and a drug-induced psychosis requiring involuntary commitment.
Mother repeatedly refused ordered hair/drug screens, had domestic-violence incidents, and was incarcerated on several occasions from 2015–2016; she has not seen Child since June 2015.
DCS filed to terminate parental rights while Mother was incarcerated (April 2016); after a hearing, the trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights (Sept. 2016). Mother appealed, challenging the sufficiency of evidence supporting termination.

Issues

Issue	Mother’s Argument	DCS / Trial Court’s Argument	Held
Whether evidence shows a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied	Mother argued her recent voluntary residential treatment and cutting ties with an abusive boyfriend show she is "stable and clean," so conditions could be remedied	Mother has a long history of substance abuse, criminal activity, prior failed treatments, refusal to comply with courts’ drug-screening orders, and prolonged absence from Child	Court affirmed: evidence supported finding a reasonable probability the conditions would not be remedied (court may weigh habitual patterns over recent improvements)
Whether termination is in Child’s best interests and whether guardianship (delay for Mother’s treatment) was preferable	Mother argued guardianship with eventual reunification after treatment would not harm Child and preserves some relationship	FCM and CASA recommended termination and adoption by aunt/uncle; court found Mother’s substance abuse, criminal history, and family conflict weighed against guardianship	Court affirmed: termination was in Child’s best interests and adoption was proper permanency plan
Standard of review — whether trial court’s findings were clearly erroneous	Mother sought deference to her asserted current stability at hearing	Trial court relied on undisputed findings supported by the record and balanced recent changes against long-term patterns	Appellate court affirmed deference to trial court: findings supported judgment and were not clearly erroneous

Key Cases Cited

In re D.D., 804 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App.) (appellate standard when reviewing termination: do not reweigh evidence)
In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App.) (deference to trial court on termination decisions)
Bester v. Lake Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind.) (two-tiered review when trial court issues findings and conclusions)
Quillen v. Quillen, 671 N.E.2d 98 (Ind.) (findings clearly erroneous only when record lacks supporting facts)
In re M.B., 666 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. Ct. App.) (parental rights protected but terminable when parents cannot meet responsibilities)
In re R.H., 892 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. Ct. App.) (termination appropriate when parents unwilling/unable to meet responsibilities)
In re K.S., 750 N.E.2d 832 (Ind. Ct. App.) (best interests of child outweigh parental interests)
In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind.) (court must balance recent improvements against habitual patterns)
K.T.K. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind.) (factors for predicting future neglect include criminal history, substance abuse, employment, housing)
A.F. v. Marion Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 762 N.E.2d 1244 (Ind. Ct. App.) (courts may consider prior criminal history and substance abuse in termination analysis)
In re J.S., 906 N.E.2d 226 (Ind. Ct. App.) (recommendations of case manager and CASA plus evidence of unremedied conditions support best‑interests finding)