Nicole R. v. Dean C., 1 CA-JV 16-0241

Mother (Nicole R.) previously relinquished rights to an older son after abuse findings; Father (Dean C.) obtained custody of daughters A.C. (born 2007) and C.W. after 2009 proceedings.
In July 2010 family court awarded Father legal and primary physical custody of both girls, finding neglect and domestic violence by Mother.
Father filed a severance petition in 2014 seeking termination of Mother’s parental rights to A.C. and C.W.; a contested trial occurred in March–April 2016.
Trial evidence showed Mother had very limited contact: a few visits in 2010–2011, none in 2012–2013, sporadic support, and limited correspondence; Mother blamed some missed visits on Father but record showed she also repeatedly canceled and failed to attend therapy visits.
The superior court found abandonment and neglect under A.R.S. § 8-533(B), and that termination was in the children’s best interests because Mother’s sporadic involvement traumatized the children and they consistently wanted no contact.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, applying clear-and-convincing evidence review for statutory grounds and preponderance standard for best interests.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	Father’s Argument	Held
Whether Mother abandoned the children under A.R.S. § 8-531(1)	Mother argued Father blocked contact and cited police report/calendar showing missed visits	Father and evidence showed Mother also repeatedly canceled, provided minimal support/contact, and failed court-ordered obligations	Court held clear and convincing evidence of abandonment (failure to maintain contact/support)
Whether termination is in children’s best interests	Mother argued no benefit to severance and pointed to absence of an adoption plan	Father, therapist, GAL and counselor argued severance provides stability, avoids re-traumatization, and benefits children who want no contact	Court held by preponderance that termination is in children’s best interests (stability, harm from continued relationship)

Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (App. 2004) (standard of review for termination findings and trial court factfinding deference)
Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (2005) (statutory requirement that at least one ground under § 8-533(B) be proven and best-interests standard)
Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 246 (App. 1999) (abandonment assessed by conduct, and severance may be affirmed on a single proper ground)
Calvin B. v. Brittany B., 232 Ariz. 292 (App. 2013) (a parent may not obstruct contact and then seek to terminate the other parent for abandonment)
Pima Cty. Severance Action No. S-1607, 147 Ariz. 237 (1985) (failure to pay child support is not per se abandonment but is a relevant factor)
Maricopa Cty. Juv. Action No. JS-500274, 167 Ariz. 1 (App. 1990) (best-interests analysis requires showing benefit from severance or harm from continuation)
O’Hair v. O’Hair, 109 Ariz. 236 (1973) (appellate review limited to whether trial court had evidence reasonably supporting its action)