In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.S. (Minor Child) and K.S. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
69A01-1710-JT-2331
Ind. Ct. App.Feb 27, 2018Background
- Mother (K.S.) began using illegal drugs in 2011; child A.S. born Oct. 9, 2013 and was frequently left in care of paternal great-grandparents who became primary caregivers.
- Multiple reports of neglect and possible physical/sexual abuse while child was in Mother’s care; Mother frequently failed to provide necessities or attend medical appointments.
- Mother had repeated positive drug tests, probation violations, arrests, and short incarcerations from 2016–2017; sporadic cooperation with services and minimal participation in recommended treatment.
- Child was removed in Jan. 2016; adjudicated CHINS in May 2016; permanency plan changed to adoption in Jan. 2017.
- Mother attended only five visits with Child during pendency; several pre-visit drug positives; Mother incarcerated from May 2017 and anticipated to remain incarcerated into mid-2018.
- DCS filed to terminate parental rights March 29, 2017; trial court terminated Mother’s rights Sept. 7, 2017; Father voluntarily consented to termination and does not appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DCS) | Defendant's Argument (K.S.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conditions leading to removal will likely be remedied (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(i)) | Mother’s continued drug use, criminal history, failure to complete services or visit child, unstable housing/employment show low probability of remedy. | Mother claims she is now ready to overcome addiction and parent the child. | Court held clear and convincing evidence supports a reasonable probability conditions will not be remedied. |
| Whether continuation of parent-child relationship poses a threat to child’s well-being (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(ii)) | Child’s PTSD/attachment disorder and Mother’s instability threaten child’s safety and development. | Mother argues court speculated about relapse and relied on conjecture. | Court found sufficient evidence (not mere speculation) that continuation posed a threat. |
| Whether termination is in child’s best interests (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(C)) | Permanency needs, experts’ recommendations, and DCS/guardian recommendations favor termination and adoption. | Mother contends court erred by relying on possible relapse rather than current readiness. | Court held termination is in child’s best interests given totality of evidence, expert recommendations, and need for stability. |
| Whether there was a satisfactory plan for care and treatment (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(D)) | DCS presented adoption plan placing child in a therapeutic, stable home with foster family. | Mother argued she could parent if given time/assistance. | Court found there was a satisfactory plan supporting termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bester v. Lake Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (two-tiered review when trial court enters findings)
- In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (pattern of unwillingness to address parenting problems supports termination)
- Lang v. Starke Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 861 N.E.2d 366 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (parent’s response to offered services is a consideration)
- In re J.T., 742 N.E.2d 509 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (court must judge parental fitness at time of termination and consider habitual conduct)
- In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (permanency is central to child’s best interests)
- In re J.S., 906 N.E.2d 226 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (case manager and CASA recommendations plus unremedied conditions can show best interests)