Maria O. v. Dcs, 1 CA-JV 17-0070

Background

Mother (Maria O.) has dependent personality disorder and depression; Father has schizophrenia and engaged in domestic violence; children P.A. (b.2007) and L.A. (b.2010) were removed from the home multiple times.
DCS filed dependency petitions (2010, 2012); services and reunification efforts occurred over several years but Mother repeatedly maintained contact with Father and displayed instability.
Children were removed from Mother’s custody in December 2013 and remained out of her care through the termination order in December 2016.
DCS changed the case plan to severance and adoption in January 2015 and moved to terminate Mother’s parental rights in February 2015.
Psychological evaluation (Oct. 2015) diagnosed chronic depression and dependent personality disorder; evaluator warned reunification would jeopardize children’s safety if Mother remained in the relationship with Father.
Juvenile court terminated Mother’s rights under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(3) (mental illness or deficiency) and § 8-533(B)(8)(c) (fifteen months’ out-of-home placement), finding DCS made diligent reunification efforts; appellate court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Mother's Argument	DCS's Argument	Held
Whether DCS made diligent efforts to provide appropriate reunification services (language access)	DCS failed to provide a Portuguese-speaking parent-aide or interpreter as recommended by Dr. Thal	Mother spoke sufficient English, completed parent-aide referrals, and did not demonstrate language interference with services	Court held DCS satisfied diligent-efforts; lack of Portuguese-speaking providers did not render services inadequate
Whether DCS provided adequate housing assistance	DCS failed to secure stable housing, forcing reliance on shelters, car, or Father	DCS provided vocational, housing resources, bus passes, childcare, and referred for housing subsidy; Mother’s employment instability caused housing loss	Court held DCS made reasonable efforts; further efforts would likely be futile given Mother’s inability to maintain employment
Whether DCS should have offered additional mental-health services after Oct. 2015 evaluation	DCS should have provided further counseling/psychiatric referrals per Dr. Thal’s recommendations	DCS asked Mother to self-refer; Mother received additional services (including Dr. Magier); Mother found counselors on her own; evaluator warned reunification unsafe while Mother stayed with Father	Court held offered mental-health services were sufficient and additional services would have been futile
Whether statutory grounds and best interests support severance (procedural/diligence claim)	Challenges only DCS’s diligence; does not contest best-interest finding or statutory bases except diligence	DCS showed long-term services, multiple referrals, and evidence of futility due to Mother’s continued instability and contact with Father	Court affirmed severance: DCS met diligent-efforts requirement and termination was proper

Key Cases Cited

Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions, 239 Ariz. 184 (App. 2016) (standard of review for severance appeals)
Jordan C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 86 (App. 2009) (trial court’s advantage as factfinder in termination proceedings)
Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (App. 2005) (burden of proof for severance: statutory ground by clear and convincing, best interests by preponderance)
Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 193 Ariz. 185 (App. 1999) (requirement of reunification efforts before termination for mental illness)
Christina G. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 227 Ariz. 231 (App. 2011) (DCS not required to provide every conceivable service or services that are futile)
Maricopa Cty. Juv. Action No. JS-501904, 180 Ariz. 348 (App. 1994) (diligent efforts defined as providing time and opportunity to participate in programs)
Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec. v. Matthew L., 223 Ariz. 547 (App. 2010) (viewing facts in light most favorable to upholding juvenile court’s order)