San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Anthony B.
239 Cal. App. 4th 389
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2015

Background

  • Infant Anthony B., born prematurely with medical needs, was removed from his parents and placed in foster care after San Diego County Health and Human Services petitioned under Welfare & Institutions Code § 300(b) due to mother's severe mental illness, parents' housing instability, prior failures to reunify with other children, domestic violence, and substance abuse.
  • The juvenile court denied services to the mother, ordered reunification services for Father, and initially allowed supervised then unsupervised visits as Father participated in services and maintained employment.
  • Father later lost housing and employment, relapsed on alcohol multiple times during visits (including overnight), missed drug tests, resumed a relationship with the mother, and was arrested and incarcerated; he had little or no contact in the five months before the permanency (§ 366.26) hearing.
  • The Agency recommended terminating reunification services at the 18‑month review and setting a § 366.26 adoption hearing; the juvenile court terminated services and later found Anthony adoptable by clear and convincing evidence.
  • At the § 366.26 hearing Father argued the parental-benefit exception (§ 366.26(c)(1)(B)(i)) applied, but the court found Father's visitation was not "substantial" or regular enough and that any parental relationship did not outweigh the benefits of adoption; the court terminated parental rights and selected adoption as the permanent plan.

Issues

Issue Father’s Argument Agency’s Argument Held
Whether Father satisfied the § 366.26(c)(1)(B)(i) "regular visitation and contact" prong Father contended he maintained regular, positive visitation and contact sufficient to meet the first prong Agency argued visits were sporadic, included intoxicated incidents, and were insufficient to create the required attachment Court held substantial evidence showed visits were not regular/substantial; prong not met
Whether the parent‑child relationship provided sufficient "benefit" to outweigh adoption Father argued any bond with Anthony made termination detrimental and adoption inappropriate Agency argued the bond was attenuated, visits ceased for months, and prospective adoptive parents provided superior stability and benefit Court held Father failed to prove the relationship promoted the child’s well‑being enough to outweigh adoption; exception inapplicable
Whether the juvenile court abused discretion in choosing adoption over alternatives Father claimed the court should have exercised discretion to preserve parental status or choose guardianship Agency relied on preference for adoption where child is adoptable and lack of compelling reason to depart from that preference Court did not abuse discretion; adoption selected consistent with statutory preference
Whether substantial evidence supports termination of parental rights Father asserted no substantial evidence supported rejection of the exception Agency pointed to court reports, Father's intoxicated visits, lengthy periods without contact, and child’s thriving placement Court’s findings affirmed as supported by substantial evidence

Key Cases Cited

Read the full case