Isbell v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2019 Ark. App. 110
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2019Background
- DHS removed A.I. (born 2016) in March 2017 after officers encountered the mother, Chelsi, who reported no utilities, food, or funds and expressed intent to steal infant formula; Chelsi stipulated to emergency removal.
- Case plan required drug testing, psychological evaluation, counseling, parenting classes, and stable housing/income/transportation; Chelsi largely failed to comply, had periods of incarceration, and limited contact with DHS or the child.
- Grandmother Janet Nicholas moved to intervene and sought custody; a SAFE home study and psychological evaluation were submitted but the court found Janet minimiz(ed) and inconsistent about her DWI history, alcohol use, and bar ownership and denied placement and relief.
- DHS changed the permanency goal to adoption and petitioned to terminate Chelsi’s parental rights on grounds including abandonment, failure to remedy, and aggravated circumstances; the court found the child adoptable and termination in the child’s best interest.
- Chelsi appealed (challenging termination, denial of continuance, and ADA accommodations); Janet appealed the refusal to place A.I. with her and the termination. The appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for termination | Chelsi: DHS failed to provide services; extenuating circumstances (mental health, incarceration) prevented compliance; relative placement (Janet) should have been favored | DHS: statutory grounds (abandonment/aggravated circumstances/failure to remedy) supported termination; adoptability and best interest satisfied | Affirmed; Chelsi did not challenge statutory findings on appeal, so termination stands |
| Motion for continuance | Chelsi: was inpatient and medically unfit to attend; counsel learned late and sought short continuance | DHS: permanency interests favor proceeding; mother had a long history of nonparticipation; delay prejudicial to child | Denial not an abuse of discretion; no prejudice shown from denial |
| ADA reasonable-accommodation claim | Chelsi: DHS failed to make reasonable accommodations for her mental-health/substance-use disabilities | DHS: claim was not raised or developed at hearing; no rulings on accommodations; not preserved for appeal | Not preserved; appellate review denied |
| Placement with grandparent (preferential relative placement) | Janet: met standards; expert home study and psychologist supported placement; she remedied prior concerns | DHS: caseworker and records showed concerns about Janet’s candor, DWIs, alcohol use, and enabling of Chelsi | Affirmed; credibility and factual findings supported denial of placement as not in child’s best interest |
| Standing to challenge services for Chelsi | Janet: court should remand for DHS to provide services to Chelsi | DHS/Ad Litem: Janet lacks standing to assert another party’s right to services; unclear party status | Janet lacks standing to challenge services; claim fails |
Key Cases Cited
- Camarillo-Cox v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 360 Ark. 340, 201 S.W.3d 391 (discusses clear-and-convincing standard in parental-termination cases)
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (deference to trial court credibility findings)
- Cranford v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2011 Ark. App. 211, 378 S.W.3d 851 (relative care can negate need for termination when permanency unaffected)
- Basham v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2015 Ark. App. 243, 459 S.W.3d 824 (continuance standard and prejudice requirement)
- Ellis v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2016 Ark. 441, 505 S.W.3d 678 (statutory preference for relative placement applies throughout proceedings)
- Rhine v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2011 Ark. App. 649, 386 S.W.3d 577 (insufficient alcohol lapses do not automatically justify termination)