Rhine v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2011 Ark. App. 649
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- C court terminated Rhine's parental rights to his daughter R.R. in 2011 after concerns of alcohol use and noncompliance with DHS orders.
- R.R. was adjudicated dependent-neglected in 2009 and initially removed from Rhine and her mother due to substance abuse and unsafe living conditions.
- Rhine was incarcerated and later released; he participated in some services (life-skills, parenting, anger management) and had progressing reunification efforts.
- The circuit court at various permanency hearings shifted goals from adoption to reunification, then again raised concerns leading to termination proceedings.
- Two alcohol-related incidents after Rhine’s release formed key grounds for termination; Rhine also had failures to consistently visit and communicate with DHS.
- The trial court ultimately terminated Rhine’s rights, but on appeal the set of facts showed Rhine’s conduct, though imperfect, did not demonstrate clear and convincing evidence that termination served R.R.’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was termination in R.R.'s best interests? | Rhine argues best interests favored reunification given bond and progress. | DHS contends alcohol incidents and noncompliance justify termination for safety and stability. | Termination not supported; court reverses. |
| Do the disputed alcohol incidents and visitation history satisfy the statutory grounds for termination under § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i) and (vii)? | Rhine's conduct showed failure to remedy removal conditions and new issues jeopardizing safety. | Rhine's conduct was limited, isolated, and not warranting irrevocable severance given bond and progress. | Not supported; clear error in termination ruling. |
Key Cases Cited
- Causer v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 93 Ark.App. 483 (Ark. App. 2005) (clear and convincing standard; due process protections)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2000) (parental rights rooted in due process)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1982) (strict burden of proof; strong safeguards before termination)
- Lassiter v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 452 U.S. 18 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1981) (high standard for termination; due process concerns)
- Benedict v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 96 Ark.App. 395 (Ark. App. 2006) (parents retain liberty interests; not all failures justify termination)