Mandy P. v. Dcs
1 CA-JV 16-0243
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Dec 8, 2016Background
- Mother and Father had three children; children were removed to DCS custody in Oct 2013 after parents’ arrests and allegations of substance abuse, domestic violence, and neglect.
- Mother admitted domestic-violence history with Father, occasional marijuana use, and some prescription-medication misuse; Father provided false info to officers.
- DCS offered reunification services (visitation, substance testing/treatment, counseling, parent-aide, psychological evaluation); Mother completed many services but had at least one positive drug test and inconsistent visitation.
- Mother allowed at least two unauthorized contacts between Father and the children during unsupervised visits; psychologist and caseworker reported unstructured visits, safety concerns, and drugs found in the home.
- Case plan changed to severance and adoption for all children in Oct 2015; Mother failed to appear at multiple hearings (including the termination hearing) and was warned that failure to appear could waive rights and permit proceeding in her absence.
- Juvenile court found statutory grounds under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(c) (15+ months out-of-home placement), concluded reunification efforts had been diligent, Mother had not remedied conditions, and termination was in the children’s best interests; appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (DCS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sufficient evidence supports termination under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(c) (15+ months) | Mother: she had stable housing, negative drug tests, completed services and visitation showed parenting capacity; contact with Father was not shown to be currently harmful | DCS: children were in out-of-home care >15 months, DCS provided services, Mother ceased cooperating, allowed unauthorized contact with Father, safety concerns persisted | Held: Affirmed. Record supported clear-and-convincing proof of statutory ground; Mother’s failures and recent conduct justified termination |
| Whether juvenile court could proceed and admit allegations when Mother failed to appear | Mother: did not contest notice/service/admonition/good-cause in appeal | DCS: Mother was warned, failed to appear without good cause, juvenile rule permits proceeding and deeming admission | Held: Court properly proceeded; Mother’s absence presumed admission but DCS still had burden to present evidence, which it did |
| Whether termination was in children’s best interests | Mother: record doesn’t show ongoing domestic violence or substance abuse; bonding assessment should have been performed | DCS: current placement meets children’s needs; adoptive placement identified; termination would provide permanency | Held: Affirmed. Preponderance supported best-interests finding (placement meeting needs and adoptive plan) |
| Whether a bonding assessment was required before severance | Mother: recommended by her psychologist and would inform stability/permanency analysis | DCS: bonding assessment not required as a matter of law | Held: Court not required to order bonding assessment; absence of one did not invalidate best-interests finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Linda V. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 211 Ariz. 76 (parental-rights termination requires statutory ground by clear and convincing evidence)
- Mario G. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 227 Ariz. 282 (best-interests standard is preponderance; severance shown if child benefits or is harmed by continuation)
- Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec. v. Oscar O., 209 Ariz. 332 (trial court’s factfinding entitled to deference)
- Jennifer B. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 189 Ariz. 553 (appellate review accepts juvenile court findings if reasonable evidence supports them)
- Manuel M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 218 Ariz. 205 (parent’s absence does not relieve court of proving statutory grounds)
- Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (best-interests determination reviewed for preponderance of evidence)
- Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (evidence that placement meets child’s needs supports best-interests finding)
- Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348 (severance may be supported by showing child would benefit from adoption)
- Shawanee S. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 234 Ariz. 174 (steps toward adoptive placement can support best-interests conclusion)