Matter of G.S. and A. S. YINC, 2017 MT 85N

Mother and Father are biological parents of G.S. (age 4) and A.S. (22 months); DNA confirmed parentage and linked to abandoned child J.L.; parents had multiple prior involuntary terminations of parental rights.
DPHHS removed G.S. and A.S. in July 2015 after an unannounced home visit revealed unsafe conditions, home births without medical care, lack of immunizations/birth certificates, and parents’ known drug histories; Father tested positive for methamphetamine, Mother refused drug testing.
Hair-follicle testing showed high methamphetamine levels for G.S. at removal and for infant A.S. two months later.
Mother repeatedly refused DPHHS services: drug testing, psychological assessment, counseling releases, and had prior history of long-term methamphetamine use and repeated noncompliance in earlier termination proceedings.
DPHHS petitioned under § 41-3-423(2)(e) seeking a finding that reunification services were not required and moved to terminate parental rights and grant permanent custody with authority to consent to adoption.
The District Court found reunification services unnecessary, terminated parental rights to G.S. and A.S., and granted permanent legal custody to DPHHS; Mother appealed only as to G.S. and A.S.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether § 41-3-423(2)(e) may be applied based on prior involuntary terminations being relevant to ability to parent current children	Prior terminations are not shown to be relevant to her present ability; she claims recent sobriety except two relapses and willingness to participate in treatment	Mother’s history of multiple involuntary terminations, ongoing refusal to comply with DPHHS services, recent drug-related evidence, and unsafe home conditions make prior terminations relevant	Court held § 41-3-423(2)(e) applies: the circumstances of prior terminations were relevant and justified denial of reunification services
Whether termination of parental rights and denial of reunification services were supported by the record and not an abuse of discretion	Argued she would comply and reunify if given services; denied that current evidence linked to past terminations was probative	Pointed to objective evidence (drug tests, unsafe home, refusal of services, kidnapping incident, prior noncompliance) supporting termination and no reasonable efforts requirement	Court found factual findings not clearly erroneous, applied law correctly, and affirmed termination and denial of reunification services

In re J.W., 371 Mont. 98, 307 P.3d 274 (Mont. 2013) (standard: abuse of discretion review for termination orders)
In re M.J., 369 Mont. 247, 296 P.3d 1197 (Mont. 2013) (definition of abuse of discretion)
In re A.K., 379 Mont. 41, 347 P.3d 711 (Mont. 2015) (clear-error review for district court factual findings)
In re K.B., 370 Mont. 254, 301 P.3d 836 (Mont. 2013) (review standard for application of law)