Reyes-Ramos v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. & Minor Children
571 S.W.3d 32
Ark. Ct. App.2019Background
- DHS removed three children after C.J. suffered severe internal and external blunt-force injuries; investigators concluded injuries were not plausibly explained by accidents and arrested Rolando Juarez.
- Children adjudicated dependent-neglected; appellant Marleny Reyes-Ramos (mother) received supervised visitation and a case plan requiring psychological evaluation, counseling, parenting classes, stable housing/employment, and compliance with a safety plan.
- Appellant completed services but repeatedly maintained the children’s injuries were accidental and continued contact with Juarez; the court found her not credible and unable to protect the children.
- DHS filed to terminate parental rights alleging subsequent factors (failure to remedy despite services) and aggravated circumstances (little likelihood of reunification given severity of abuse).
- The circuit court terminated appellant’s parental rights based on aggravated circumstances and subsequent factors, finding she had not benefitted from services, remained allied with Juarez, and posed an ongoing safety risk.
- Appellant appealed, arguing the court disregarded expert testimony favorable to reunification and improperly shifted the burden to her to prove fitness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Reyes-Ramos) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was little likelihood of successful reunification (aggravated circumstances) | Dr. DeRoeck and a therapist testified reunification could be viable; appellant made therapeutic progress and had separate housing, so reunification was possible with more time | Appellant never acknowledged the abuse, continued contact with Juarez, and did not benefit from services; physical-abuse context requires demonstrated ability to protect children | Court affirmed: substantial evidence supports aggravated-circumstances finding and little likelihood of reunification |
| Whether DHS offered appropriate family services and whether appellant failed to remedy subsequent factors | Appellant completed services and participated in therapy; experts recommended family therapy and opined improvement was possible | DHS showed it provided services and testified no further services would likely enable reunification given appellant’s lack of acknowledgment and ongoing contact with abuser | Court found DHS provided services but appellant did not make measurable progress toward remedying causes of removal; termination supported on subsequent-factors ground as alternative |
| Whether the court improperly shifted burden to appellant to prove fitness | Appellant contends court language effectively required her to prove fitness rather than DHS proving unfitness | DHS and court relied on credibility findings, evidence of nonrecognition of abuse, and contact with abuser to show unfitness | Court rejected appellant’s burden-shift argument and distinguished Choate; credibility and evidence supported termination |
Key Cases Cited
- Knuckles v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 469 S.W.3d 377 (Ark. App. 2015) (standard for termination review and clear-and-convincing proof)
- M.T. v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 952 S.W.2d 177 (Ark. App. 1997) (statutory requirement of at least one ground plus best-interest finding)
- Threadgill v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 526 S.W.3d 891 (Ark. App. 2017) (aggravated-circumstances definition and standards)
- Bentley v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 554 S.W.3d 285 (Ark. App. 2018) (parent’s inability to protect and failure to benefit from services support aggravated-circumstances finding)
- Sanford v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 474 S.W.3d 503 (Ark. App. 2015) (only one statutory ground required to terminate parental rights)
- Choate v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 522 S.W.3d 156 (Ark. App. 2017) (DHS bears burden to prove parental unfitness; distinguishes cases where court merely states parent failed to show fitness)