J.P. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.), 71A03-1610-JT-2441

Background

Mother and Father have three children removed in March 2014 after reports of drug use, filthy home conditions, physical abuse (L.P. with belt marks), and disclosures of sexual abuse in Mother’s home; children adjudicated CHINS July 2014.
DCS ordered services (substance-abuse treatment, supervised visitation, home-based therapy, domestic-violence classes); Mother had repeated poor attendance, positive drug screens, criminal involvement (armed robbery conviction, jail time, probation violation), and inconsistent engagement with case management.
Mother’s supervised visits were often chaotic; the children displayed severe behavioral and PTSD-related issues that improved with therapy and cessation of visits; visits were suspended August 2016 and the children had not seen Mother since then.
DCS filed petitions to terminate Mother’s parental rights June 2015; an evidentiary hearing occurred May 2016; trial court terminated Mother’s rights September 26, 2016.
Trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that (1) there is a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal or continued out-of-home placement will not be remedied and (2) continuation of the parent-child relationship poses a threat to the children; it also found termination was in the children’s best interests and a satisfactory plan existed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence supports finding a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal or continued placement will not be remedied (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(i))	DCS: Mother’s longstanding substance abuse, failure to complete services, criminal history, domestic violence, and inability to parent show low likelihood of remedy.	Mother: Physical abuse that caused removal ceased after removal; no evidence it would recur.	Court: Affirmed—Mother’s continued noncompliance, relapse risk, and ongoing related safety factors support reasonable probability conditions will not be remedied.
Whether continuation of the parent–child relationship poses a threat to the children’s well-being (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(B)(ii))	DCS: Mother’s instability and negative impact of visits on children’s mental health create a threat.	Mother: Argues lack of continued abuse after removal reduces threat.	Court: Affirmed—evidence of harm/trauma and destabilizing visits supported threat finding.
Whether termination is in the children’s best interests (IC 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(C))	DCS: Children’s improved functioning in foster care, case manager and guardian ad litem recommendations, and need for permanency favor termination.	Mother: Therapist warned termination would be traumatic for the girls.	Court: Affirmed—totality of evidence, recommendations for termination, and permanency concerns outweighed trauma risk.
Whether trial court’s factual findings (including in-court observations of Mother) were unsupported or reversible error	DCS: Findings based on record and court observations; any immaterial findings do not affect outcome.	Mother: Challenges several findings about her courtroom demeanor and third-party contacts as unsupported.	Court: Findings sustained or deemed harmless surplusage; in-court demeanor findings are proper for factfinder and did not affect ultimate ruling.

Key Cases Cited

Bester v. Lake Cnty. Office of Family & Children, 839 N.E.2d 143 (Ind. 2005) (two-tier review when trial court enters findings and conclusions)
In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind. 2014) (trial court may weigh prior history more heavily than recent efforts)
In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2009) (permanency is central in best-interests analysis)
In re L.S., 717 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (pattern of unwillingness to address parenting supports finding of no reasonable probability of change)
In re D.D., 804 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (appellate standard: do not reweigh evidence or judge credibility)
Lasater v. Lasater, 809 N.E.2d 380 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (erroneous findings that are surplusage do not require reversal)