Rivera v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
558 S.W.3d 876
Ark. Ct. App.2018Background
- DHS removed G.H. (born 2015) after mother's arrest for stabbing her stepfather; child adjudicated dependent-neglected July 20, 2016, and remained in DHS custody.
- Court ordered reunification services: drug treatment, random screens, stable housing/employment, visitation; DHS provided services and case management.
- Rivera completed inpatient treatment but was discharged from one program for rule violations; she later tested positive for methamphetamine, amphetamines, cocaine, and benzodiazepines in 2017 (urine and hair tests).
- Rivera’s housing, employment, transportation, and visitation were inconsistent; she moved out of state (Memphis) late in the case and had intermittent contact with DHS and the child.
- DHS filed to terminate parental rights (Oct. 2017) alleging multiple statutory grounds; the circuit court terminated Rivera’s rights Jan. 3, 2018, finding subsequent factors, failure-to-remedy, and aggravated circumstances proved and that termination was in the child’s best interest (child adoptable; potential harm if returned).
Issues
| Issue | Rivera's Argument | DHS's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether subsequent-factors ground supported termination (post-petition drug use, missed visits, unstable housing/employment/transportation, out-of-state move) | Positive 2017 drug tests were isolated; she completed treatment and maintained sobriety thereafter; missed visits were partly DHS’s fault and she had recent stable housing/support | Rivera repeatedly relapsed, failed to maintain stability, missed many visits, and moved out of state where DHS could not provide services | Court upheld termination on subsequent-factors ground: clear and convincing evidence supported finding Rivera manifested incapacity/indifference to remedy issues |
| Whether reliance on failure-to-remedy ground was improper because court considered post-removal facts | Argued court impermissibly relied on subsequent events to show failure to remedy original conditions | DHS asserted meaningful services were offered and Rivera had not remedied conditions causing removal over 19 months | Court avoided reversible error by affirming on subsequent-factors ground (only one ground required); distinguished Rivera from cases where short-term relapse was cured |
| Whether DHS’s failures (transportation/visitation) preclude termination | Rivera claimed DHS’s logistical failures (transporter moved counties, missed calls) caused missed visits, undermining DHS’s proof that services were meaningful | DHS showed it offered transportation and visitation repeatedly; Rivera nonetheless missed many visits and provided inconsistent contact | Court noted some missed visits were DHS’s fault but concluded overall visitation was inconsistent and did not preclude termination given other evidence of instability |
| Whether termination was in child’s best interest (adoptability and potential harm) | Rivera argued isolated lapses didn’t show risk of harm and she had supports and recent stability | DHS and court pointed to prolonged instability, positive drug tests, and limited parent-child contact as evidence of potential harm | Court found child adoptable and that returning him posed potential harm; best-interest finding supported by same evidence as statutory grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Bryant v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 554 S.W.3d 295 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018) (standard for appellate review and clear-and-convincing proof in termination cases)
- Kight v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 189 S.W.3d 498 (Ark. Ct. App. 2004) (reversal where relapse was isolated and parent completed treatment and maintained sobriety)
- Strickland v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 287 S.W.3d 633 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008) (short residency history insufficient in presence of consistent visitation and other stabilizing facts)
- Miller v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 525 S.W.3d 48 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017) (evidence supporting statutory ground can also support potential-harm/best-interest prong)
- Bell v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 503 S.W.3d 112 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016) (failure to provide stable housing and comply with orders demonstrates potential harm)
- Bearden v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 42 S.W.3d 397 (Ark. 2001) (addressing risk-of-harm analysis in reunification context)
- Martin v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 515 S.W.3d 599 (Ark. 2017) (unchallenged prior court findings bind parties on appeal)