McHenry v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2014 Ark. App. 443

Father Calvin McHenry appealed the circuit court’s December 17, 2013 order terminating reunification services in a dependency–neglect matter involving his three children (children had been out of his custody since 2009).
Children originally removed in 2009 after mother Suzann physically abused A.M.; children were placed with paternal grandparents, who later lost guardianship after environmental-neglect findings in 2011.
DHS changed the permanency goal to adoption and filed to terminate reunification services for Calvin; the court later authorized pursuit of termination of parental rights as well (mother’s rights were terminated in May 2013).
The court denied reunification-termination allegations based on sexual abuse and the father’s status as a registered sex offender, but found by clear and convincing evidence that there were aggravated circumstances because there was little likelihood that further services would result in successful reunification.
Calvin argued DHS failed to provide services to him in a timely manner, that he had begun complying after being included in the case plan, and that DHS had not proved the statutory ground; the court rejected these arguments and affirmed termination of reunification services.

Issue	McHenry’s Argument	DHS’s Argument	Held
Whether evidence supports finding “little likelihood” that services would result in reunification (aggravated circumstances)	McHenry: DHS delayed providing services; he complied after inclusion and attended hearings; termination after four months of services was premature	DHS: Children had been out of father’s custody for years; father failed to pursue custody or meaningful efforts earlier; further services unlikely to succeed	Court: Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supports finding little likelihood further services would achieve reunification
Whether the trial court erred in denying McHenry’s motion to dismiss after child testimony and a hearsay ruling	McHenry: Court should have dismissed because proffered hearsay was excluded and child testimony was not credible	DHS: Even excluding sexual-abuse and offender-status allegations, other evidence supports the little-likelihood ground	Court: No error — court had granted McHenry directed verdict on sexual-abuse and sex-offender grounds and based termination solely on little-likelihood finding, which was supported

Chase v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 184 S.W.3d 453 (Ark. Ct. App. 2004) (appellate review of clear-and-convincing finding in child-welfare matters gives deference to trial court credibility findings and observations of the judge)