In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of M.A. (Minor Child) and K.S. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 91A02-1702-JT-352

Background

Child M.A. (b. 2003) was removed from Father after parental substance overdoses; DCS did not place Child with Mother due to allegations and evidence of Mother’s drug use.
Mother admitted to long-term methamphetamine addiction and repeatedly tested positive during the CHINS case (multiple positives from 2014–2016) and failed or refused many drug screens.
Mother completed a 60-day residential program but failed to complete relapse-prevention, continued using meth, and faced pending criminal charges for meth possession and paraphernalia during the termination proceedings.
Services and visitation were inconsistent: Mother missed appointments and visits, lost utilities, lacked stable employment, and Child found drug paraphernalia in her home during a visit.
DCS filed to terminate Mother’s parental rights in July 2016; a December 2016 termination hearing followed, and the trial court entered findings and terminated Mother’s rights. Father had signed a consent to adoption.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mother)	Defendant's Argument (DCS)	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to show a reasonable probability that the conditions leading to removal (Mother’s meth use/instability) will not be remedied	Mother argued DCS should have given her more time to stabilize and that she should be allowed to continue transitioning to sole custody; insufficiency because more time would avoid coercive intervention	DCS pointed to repeated positive meth tests, failed relapse-prevention, ongoing instability, and lack of progress over ~30 months as clear and convincing evidence the conditions would not be remedied	Held for DCS: ample evidence supported finding of reasonable probability conditions would not be remedied
Whether termination is in Child’s best interests	Mother claimed termination was premature and not required for Child’s welfare	DCS relied on testimony of the family case manager and guardian ad litem plus the unremedied conditions to show termination served Child’s best interests	Held for DCS: testimony and evidence supported best-interest conclusion
Procedural/briefing deficiencies affecting appellate review	Mother’s brief contained no citations to the record; she did not challenge the trial court’s 56 findings of fact	DCS relied on trial court findings and argued review is deferential; procedural rules require record citations and challenges to findings	Held: Court noted waiver potential but reviewed and affirmed; failure to cite record and to attack findings undermined Mother’s appellate arguments

Key Cases Cited

In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (standard for appellate review of termination—clear-and-convincing burden and highly deferential review)
In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (role of findings of fact and appellate scope in termination appeals)
Pierce v. State, 29 N.E.3d 1258 (Ind. 2015) (failure to support arguments with record citations constitutes waiver)
City of Indianapolis v. Buschman, 988 N.E.2d 791 (Ind. 2013) (same principle on briefing and preservation of issues)
In re S.E., 15 N.E.3d 37 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (guardian ad litem/family-case-manager testimony plus unremedied conditions can support best-interest finding)
In re A.D.S., 987 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (same)
In re I.A., 903 N.E.2d 146 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (same)
In re A.I., 825 N.E.2d 798 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (same)