Joy B. v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's Services
2016 WL 6310769
Alaska2016Background
- Joy B. fled Ohio to Alaska in 2013 with four daughters to escape extreme domestic violence by the girls’ father; the family remained chaotic in Alaska with frequent physical and verbal altercations and significant trauma-related needs.
- OCS received numerous reports, began involvement in early 2014, and removed the older daughters in February 2014; all four daughters were placed in State custody by June 2014 after Joy obstructed services and refused court-ordered safety checks and evaluations.
- Joy repeatedly refused to complete a psychological evaluation, declined supervised visits, resisted service referrals, and ultimately left Alaska in October 2014 without notifying OCS; contact with the children thereafter was sporadic.
- OCS provided a case plan, numerous team decision meetings, referrals for therapy and parenting programs, and even purchased plane tickets to facilitate a visit, but Joy largely did not engage.
- OCS sought termination of parental rights for all four daughters; by the November 2015 trial OCS proceeded only against the two younger daughters, Alyse and Arianna. The superior court terminated parental rights, finding abandonment, failure to remedy, reasonable efforts by OCS, and that termination was in the children’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Joy) | Defendant's Argument (State/OCS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Joy failed to remedy the conduct/conditions making the children CINA (AS 47.10.088(a)(2)) | Removing the children from Drake was a major remedial step; no direct evidence of physical harm in Alaska | Joy’s post-relocation conduct (chaos, refusal to engage, leaving state, minimal contact) continued to place children at risk; abandonment was pleaded and proved | Court: No clear error — Joy failed to remedy, abandonment supported termination |
| Whether OCS made reasonable efforts to reunify (AS 47.10.086) | OCS failed to tailor services to Joy’s domestic-violence victim needs and assigned inexperienced staff | OCS offered multiple services, team meetings, referrals, court-ordered evaluation, and even paid airfare; Joy refused to cooperate or complete evaluations | Court: No error — OCS made reasonable efforts given Joy’s noncooperation |
| Whether termination is in the children’s best interests (AS 47.10.088(c)) | Separation harms mother and children; family unit approach favors mother-child recovery; strong bond exists | Children had improved in foster care; one child sought adoption; stability and permanency favored termination | Court: No clear error — termination serves children’s best interests |
| Whether procedural or analytical errors require reversal (e.g., failure to cite statutory factors) | Court failed to expressly analyze statutory best-interest factors listed in AS 47.10.088(b) | Statute lists factors the court may consider; trial court made findings relevant to those factors even if not labeled | Court: No reversible error — omission of explicit statutory labels not required; findings supported result |
Key Cases Cited
- Sean B. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 251 P.3d 330 (Alaska 2011) (abandonment standard and parental conduct that evidences willful disregard)
- Sherman B. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 290 P.3d 421 (Alaska 2012) (failure-to-remedy and best-interests standards)
- Trevor M. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 368 P.3d 607 (Alaska 2016) (parental history as predictor of future behavior)
- Sherry R. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 332 P.3d 1268 (Alaska 2014) (standard for reviewing reasonable efforts and failure-to-remedy)
- Wilson W. v. State, Office of Children’s Servs., 185 P.3d 94 (Alaska 2008) (parent noncooperation limits scope of OCS obligations; reasonable efforts analysis)
- Chloe W. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children’s Servs., 336 P.3d 1258 (Alaska 2014) (standard of review and best-interests review)