Miller v. Arkansas Department of Humans Services
2016 Ark. App. 239
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- DHS removed two daughters (T.M., born 2005; T.C., born 2009) after reports and medical findings of neglect, poor hygiene, bruising, and possible sexual abuse; emergency custody granted July 2013.
- Miller stipulated to dependency-neglect (environmental and medical neglect); case plan requirements imposed (counseling, drug screens, stable housing/employment, child support).
- Over the case period Miller had unstable housing, drug convictions (delivery of a controlled substance), inconsistent participation in services, positive drug tests earlier in the case, and limited contact with DHS; T.M. remained in a residential treatment facility for severe needs.
- DHS changed the permanency goal to adoption and filed to terminate Miller’s parental rights on multiple statutory grounds (including continued out-of-home placement, failure to remedy conditions, failure to support/maintain contact, and alleged aggravating circumstances).
- At the termination hearing the foster mother of T.C. testified she intended to adopt T.C.; no testimony established adoptability for T.M.; the trial court terminated Miller’s parental rights to both T.C. and T.M. and found abandonment attributable to the mother and a parental abandonment/aggravating circumstance finding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Miller) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court’s best-interest finding was proper given lack of evidence on adoptability | No evidence established likelihood of adoption for either child; court erred by not finding that lack of adoptability evidence would not have mattered | Caseworker’s and foster-parent testimony implied adoptability for T.C.; adoptability need not be proved by clear-and-convincing evidence | Affirmed as to T.C. (sufficient foster-parent testimony); reversed and remanded as to T.M. (no evidence on adoptability and no court explanation that adoptability was immaterial) |
| Whether trial court’s finding of abandonment was improper because DHS did not plead abandonment as to Miller | Miller: DHS failed to plead abandonment as to him, so court could not find abandonment against him | DHS: petition alleged abandonment of the mother and alleged aggravating circumstances; court cited statutory subsections supporting abandonment findings | Affirmed — record shows DHS alleged abandonment of the mother and court applied abandonment/aggravating-subsection findings appropriately |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 478 S.W.3d 272 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (standard of review and elements for termination: statutory ground by clear and convincing evidence and best-interest analysis)
- Lively v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 456 S.W.3d 383 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015) (reversal where record lacked evidence of children’s adoptability though court relied on adoptability)
- Reed v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 417 S.W.3d 736 (Ark. Ct. App. 2012) (adoptability need not be proved by clear and convincing evidence)
- Grant v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 378 S.W.3d 227 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010) (adoptability is a consideration, not a requirement, but the court must have evidence or state why lack of adoptability proof is immaterial)