Jessup v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2011 Ark. App. 463
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- This is an appeal from a Craighead County Circuit Court order terminating Shawna Jessup and Joel Jessup’s parental rights to their children P.J. and S.J.
- DHS filed a petition in May 2009; emergency custody followed after a DHS report alleging environmental neglect, supervision failures, and drug issues, triggering a 72-hour hold.
- Several court hearings occurred: probable-cause (May 2009), adjudication (Sept 2009) finding dependency-neglect and lack of stable housing, and multiple DHS case-plan requirements for reunification.
- Psychological evaluations by Dr. DeRoeck (Dec 2009) diagnosed Shawna with substance dependence issues and guarded prognosis; Joel’s evaluation indicated serious mental health concerns and ongoing polysubstance use.
- Shawna tested positive for drugs on multiple screens; Joel completed some steps but had ongoing drug use and unstable housing; advancement toward reunification stalled, with DHS making reasonable efforts toward reunification.
- On November 19, 2010, the circuit court terminated parental rights, finding failure to remediate and continued health/safety risks, and adopted the foster family as adopters.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was proven by clear and convincing evidence | DHS contends parents failed to remedy conditions and remained unfit. | Jessups claim evidence does not establish unfitness or risk to health/safety. | Yes; clear and convincing evidence supported termination. |
| Whether termination was in the best interests of the children | DHS argues best interests favor termination with adoption by foster parents. | Jessups argue restoration of custody was feasible with services. | Yes; best interests favored termination and adoption. |
| Whether the court properly weighed Joel's last-minute improvements under Prows | DHS asserts improvements were properly weighed and not dispositive. | Jessup argues recent progress should have extended reunification time. | No reversible error; court adequately weighed progress and remaining concerns. |
Key Cases Cited
- Welch v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 378 S.W.3d 290 (2010 Ark. App. 798) (grounds and best-interest analysis in termination cases; de novo review with clear-and-convincing standard)
- Prows v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services, 283 S.W.3d 637 (2008 Ark. App.) (last-minute improvements may be weighed but do not outweigh termination if unfit)
- Davis v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services, 254 S.W.3d 762 (2007 Ark. App.) (reunification efforts and consideration of evidence in best-interest determination)