364 So.3d 644
Miss. Ct. App.2020Background
- T.C., born 2014, was removed from his parents’ custody in March 2017 after an anonymous report and drug tests showed Jason Chitwood tested positive for methamphetamine; the child also tested positive.
- Stone County DCPS placed T.C. in foster care, adjudicated him neglected, and created service plans requiring drug treatment, random screens, proof of employment, parenting classes, visitation, and contact.
- Chitwood failed four of five post-removal drug screens, did not complete required treatment or parenting classes, did not provide proof of employment, and had minimal/irregular contact or visitation with T.C.
- A guardian ad litem (GAL) was appointed, investigated, interviewed T.C., visited the foster home, repeatedly attempted to contact Chitwood (including giving him her contact information), and recommended termination when contact and compliance were lacking.
- The chancery court found clear and convincing evidence of multiple statutory grounds (drug addiction/failure of treatment, failure to provide necessities, failure to exercise reasonable visitation/communication, and erosion of the parent–child relationship) and held termination was in the child’s best interest.
- Chitwood appealed, arguing the GAL’s failure to interview him was reversible error and that termination grounds were not proved by clear and convincing evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Chitwood) | Defendant's Argument (DCPS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of GAL representation | GAL did not interview Chitwood before recommendation; thus failed to protect child’s interests | GAL investigated, interviewed child, visited foster home, repeatedly attempted contact, provided contact info but Chitwood did not respond | No reversible error; GAL’s efforts and the record sufficiently protected child’s interests |
| Sufficiency of evidence for termination | Grounds for termination not proven by clear and convincing evidence | Multiple statutory grounds met: repeated positive drug tests, failure to complete services, lack of contact/visitation, erosion of relationship, child bonded with foster home | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supported termination on multiple statutory grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- M.J.S.H.S. v. Yalobusha Cty. Dep’t of Human Servs., 782 So. 2d 737 (Miss. 2001) (GALs have affirmative duty to zealously represent child’s best interests)
- In re D.K.L., 652 So. 2d 184 (Miss. 1995) (GAL’s failure to fully investigate/interview may require remand)
- Blakeney v. McRee, 188 So. 3d 1154 (Miss. 2016) (standard of review for chancery findings in parental-termination cases)
- In re K.D.G. II, 68 So. 3d 748 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (clear-and-convincing-evidence requirement applies in termination proceedings)
- Chism v. Bright, 152 So. 3d 318 (Miss. 2014) (discussing parental-rights termination and best-interest considerations)
- Barber v. Barber, 288 So. 3d 325 (Miss. 2020) (GALs serve as appointed investigators/advisors and should recommend course of action)
- S.G. v. D.C., 13 So. 3d 269 (Miss. 2009) (role and authority of GAL in child-protection proceedings)