Rodgers v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2016 Ark. App. 569
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- DHS removed nine-year-old C.R. from Darlene Rodgers’ home after reports and police investigation showed ~20 healing bruises and an incident at a bus stop; Rodgers was arrested for domestic battery.
- Circuit court adjudicated C.R. dependent-neglected (cuts/welts/bruises) and ordered services for Rodgers (parenting, anger management, stable housing/income, no-contact, submission of psychological evaluation).
- Rodgers completed court-ordered services; case initially moved toward reunification but permanency goal changed to termination after C.R. remained out of her custody 12+ months and was diagnosed with PTSD and continued to exhibit panic attacks and nightmares about returning to Rodgers.
- At the termination hearing, therapist Chelsea Fife and C.R. testified that C.R. remained fearful of Rodgers and did not want to return; foster parents testified C.R. was thriving and wanted adoption.
- Rodgers denied abuse, claimed C.R. had behavioral/psychiatric problems and that she used talk therapy; DHS witnesses reported Rodgers admitted spanking with a belt and made statements indicating the belt could return.
- The circuit court terminated Rodgers’ parental rights on two statutory grounds: (1) dependent-neglected juvenile out of parent’s custody 12 months and conditions causing removal not remedied despite DHS efforts; and (2) aggravated circumstances (chronically abused). Rodgers appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Rodgers) | Defendant's Argument (DHS) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i)(a) "12-month out-of-custody / failure-to-remedy" ground supports termination | Rodgers: Court may not base failure-to-remedy on abuse when adjudication was for neglect; she cannot be required to remedy an issue not found at adjudication | DHS: Statute looks to the "conditions that caused removal," not the label used at adjudication; evidence showed safety fears and unexplained injuries persisted | Held: Affirmed — the court properly found conditions that caused removal (safety issues, fear, unexplained injuries) were not remedied despite services. |
| Whether completion of case plan bars termination | Rodgers: Completion of ordered services demonstrates remedy; termination improper | DHS: Completion alone is not dispositive; courts assess whether root causes were remedied and child safe | Held: Affirmed — compliance with services does not preclude termination if root problems persist. |
| Whether aggravated-circumstances ground is supported (chronic abuse / extreme or repeated cruelty) | Rodgers: Evidence insufficient; court relied mainly on child’s testimony which does not establish chronic abuse | DHS: Testimony of child and therapist (and other evidence) established repeated physical and emotional abuse and justified aggravated-circumstances finding | Held: Affirmed — credible testimony (child and therapist) and totality of evidence supported finding of chronic physical and emotional abuse. |
| Whether the circuit court improperly retroactively found Rodgers to be the abuser | Rodgers: Court had no authority to retroactively find she committed abuse when adjudication did not label her the perpetrator | DHS: Even if not formally labeled at adjudication, parent can be responsible for conditions rendering child unsafe; court may base termination on lack of safety in parent’s care | Held: Affirmed — court reasonably concluded child was unsafe in Rodgers’ care; court’s credibility findings supported that conclusion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 344 Ark. 207, 40 S.W.3d 286 (credibility determinations by trial court given deference on appeal)
- Jackson v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 429 S.W.3d 276 (parent not responsible for conditions that caused removal when not in parent’s custody at time of removal)
- Weatherspoon v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 426 S.W.3d 520 (completion of case plan is not dispositive; must show root cause remedied)
- Lee v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 285 S.W.3d 277 (mere compliance with services insufficient if underlying problems remain)