Jennifer S. v. Department of Child Safety
240 Ariz. 282
| Ariz. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Mother has a decades-long history of heavy methamphetamine and other substance use beginning at age 14; both Mother and child tested positive for methamphetamine at the child’s June 2013 birth.
- DCS provided services (drug testing, TERROS/Valle Del Sol treatment, parent aide, psychological evaluation) after filing dependency in Sept. 2013; Mother repeatedly missed/failed drug tests, tested positive multiple times, and used a nonhuman-urine device.
- Child was removed in Sept. 2013 and remained in out-of-home care; the juvenile court changed the case plan to severance and adoption in Sept. 2014.
- Mother used methamphetamine again after the severance motion but completed 30-day residential treatment (Dec. 2014), aftercare, counseling, NA meetings, and tested negative from Dec. 2014 until the severance hearing in mid-2015; she also completed a psychological evaluation (Dec. 2014).
- Dr. Korsten diagnosed severe stimulant use disorder in early remission, a personality disorder with antisocial features, and opined Mother needed at least one year (possibly 1.5–2 years) of sustained sobriety plus stable housing/employment before safe reunification; juvenile court found chronic substance abuse ground proved and that severance was in the child’s best interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(3) chronic substance abuse was proved | Mother: recent months of sobriety, engagement in services, housing/employment steps show condition resolved | DCS: decades-long severe use, relapse history, poor engagement, and deception show chronic abuse likely to continue | Court: Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supports chronic substance-abuse ground |
| Whether evidence of recent sobriety outweighed prior history | Mother: recent sustained abstinence and service completion undermine finding of prolonged risk | DCS: temporary abstinence does not overcome long history of relapse and noncompliance; prior history is relevant | Court: Recent sobriety did not outweigh extensive history and relapse risk; court may consider prior history in predicting future conduct |
| Whether severance could be sustained on time-in-care grounds | Mother: contested factual sufficiency (argued) | DCS: alternative statutory grounds (nine-, six-, fifteen-month out-of-home) supported severance | Court: Did not reach time-in-care grounds because chronic-substance-abuse ground alone supported severance; affirmed on that ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Raymond F. v. Arizona Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 224 Ariz. 373, 231 P.3d 377 (App. 2010) (temporary abstinence does not necessarily outweigh long history of abuse; child’s interest in permanency)
- Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279, 110 P.3d 1013 (2005) (parents’ fundamental liberty interest; standards for termination)
- Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278, 53 P.3d 203 (App. 2002) (appelate review deference to juvenile court’s factual findings in severance cases)
- Matthew L. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 547, 225 P.3d 604 (2010) (appellate standard: will not disturb juvenile court if reasonable evidence supports findings)
- Jordan C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 86, 219 P.3d 296 (App. 2009) (juvenile court best positioned to weigh credibility and resolve factual disputes)
- Cochise Cty. Juv. Action No. 5666-J, 133 Ariz. 157, 650 P.2d 459 (1982) (juvenile court’s discretion in balancing child, parent, and state interests)
- Pima Cty. Adoption of B-6355, 118 Ariz. 111, 575 P.2d 310 (1978) (appellate courts should not substitute their judgment for trial court’s factfinding)