Mariah Rodriguez Roberts v. Roanoke City Department of Social Services
0853213
Va. Ct. App.May 31, 2022Background:
- Since 2017 DSS received repeated reports about L.A.R. alleging neglect, poor hygiene, lack of supervision, substance use in the home, and possible sexual abuse; DSS removed L.A.R. in 2019 and the JDR court adjudicated abuse/neglect.
- Mother gave birth to B.R.K. after L.A.R.’s removal; B.R.K. was placed in the same foster home and also adjudicated abused/neglected.
- DSS provided services (parenting classes, counseling, psychological and attachment evaluations). Evaluators found mother in denial about the alleged sexual abuse and insufficiently protective; evaluators also criticized grandmother’s conduct and lack of insight.
- Supervised visits with mother and grandmother correlated with escalation of L.A.R.’s anxiety, nightmares, and behavioral problems; DSS suspended visits and both children improved and bonded with foster parents.
- Grandmother sought custody/visitation (JDR denied custody petition and she did not appeal); she was later discharged from therapy for hostile behavior and failed to engage with services.
- The circuit court terminated mother’s parental rights under Code § 16.1-283(B) and (C)(2) and approved adoption as the foster-care goal; the Court of Appeals affirmed the termination and adoption goal, holding grandmother lacked standing to challenge the termination.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grandmother's standing to appeal termination of mother’s parental rights | Grandmother argued the termination effectively terminated her custodial interests and she may challenge it | DSS: grandmother is a nonparent with no independent legal custodial right and thus lacks standing to assert mother’s rights | Grandmother lacks standing to appeal the termination of mother’s parental rights |
| Sufficiency of evidence to terminate mother’s parental rights under §16.1-283(B)/(C)(2) | Mother argued termination was inappropriate/ unnecessary and she had made progress and could rehabilitate | DSS: mother remained in denial about abuse, failed to protect children, conditions posed serious/substantial risk and were unlikely to be remedied within a reasonable time | Affirmed termination under §16.1-283(B): clear and convincing evidence of serious risk and inability to remedy within reasonable time; no need to reach (C)(2) |
| Whether DSS erred by approving adoption instead of placing children with grandmother | Mother and grandmother argued the court failed to give proper consideration to family placement or grandmother adoption | DSS: it considered and offered services to grandmother but she was hostile, noncompliant with services, and children did better without contact; grandmother was unsuitable | Court properly considered grandmother; found her unsuitable and approved adoption goal |
Key Cases Cited
- Yafi v. Stafford Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 69 Va. App. 539 (2018) (standard of appellate review in termination cases)
- Tackett v. Arlington Cnty. Dep’t of Hum. Servs., 62 Va. App. 296 (2013) (nonparents may not assert third-party parental rights; standing principles)
- Castillo v. Loudoun Cnty. Dep’t of Fam. Servs., 68 Va. App. 547 (2018) (DSS must produce evidence regarding relatives as placement options)
- Fields v. Dinwiddie Cty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 46 Va. App. 1 (2005) (clear-and-convincing standard required for termination)
- M.G. v. Albemarle Cnty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 41 Va. App. 170 (2003) (parental rights should not be lightly severed)
- Levick v. MacDougall, 294 Va. 283 (2017) (standards for sealing and unsealing records)