Lynda H. v. Dcs, J.S., 1 CA-JV 17-0130

Child J.S. (b. 2011) removed from Mother in Oct 2014 after reports of physical abuse, domestic violence in Mother’s home, and risk from Mother’s adult sons.
DCS filed dependency; Mother underwent psychiatric and psychological evaluations; psychologist recommended long-term therapy (DBT) and noted borderline personality traits and prognosis concerns.
DCS offered services: case management, parenting classes, parent-aide sessions, domestic-violence counseling, psychiatric and psychological evaluations, and referrals for DBT; Mother inconsistently engaged and failed to complete parent-aide program.
Referrals for DBT were delayed at times; Mother eventually began individual DBT in May 2016 and group DBT after an expedited referral, but missed visits and continued to deny responsibility for violent conduct.
Superior court terminated Mother’s parental rights under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(c) (15-month out-of-home placement), finding DCS made diligent efforts to provide reunification services and that severance was in the child’s best interest.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DCS made diligent efforts to provide appropriate reunification services	Lynda: DCS delayed offering recommended DBT, failing to provide expert-recommended services	DCS: Provided evaluations, multiple services, and referrals; delays were not unreasonable and Mother delayed/failed to engage	Court: DCS made diligent, reasonable efforts; delays were not prejudicial
Whether delay in psychological evaluation/DBT referral invalidates time in care exclusion	Lynda: Delay shows lack of reasonable efforts, warranting exclusion of time	DCS: Evaluation sequence and referrals were appropriate; Mother also sought self-referrals	Court: Sequence and timing not unreasonably delayed; exclusion denied and termination proceeded
Whether Mother remedied circumstances causing removal within 15 months	Lynda: Participation in services would have remedied issues if timely provided	DCS: Mother continued denial, failed to change behavior, and allowed risky adult children access	Court: Mother failed to remedy circumstances; likelihood of future incapacity to parent found
Whether severance is in child’s best interest	Lynda: Bond with child argues against severance	DCS: Child placed with intervenor who provides stability and is willing to adopt	Court: Severance benefits child — permanency, safety, and stability; best interest established

Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (App. 2004) (standard of review for termination and requirement to view evidence in light most favorable to the decision)
Jordan C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 86 (App. 2010) (DCS must offer services with reasonable prospect of reunification; not required to provide futile measures)
Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 193 Ariz. 185 (App. 1999) (agency’s failure to offer recommended services can show negligible efforts and undermine severance grounds)
Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (2005) (statutory standards for severance: burden of proof requirements)
Oscar O. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 209 Ariz. 332 (App. 2004) (best-interest framework for severance — benefits vs. harm analysis)
Minh T. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 202 Ariz. 76 (App. 2002) (parental rights are fundamental but limited by statutory grounds for severance)
Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 240 Ariz. 96 (App. 2016) (existence of parent-child bond is not dispositive in best-interest analysis)