Sarah R. v. Dcs, 1 CA-JV 17-0317

Mother’s three children were removed in April 2016 due to unsafe living conditions, the mother’s and another adult’s substance abuse, domestic violence, and unmet educational needs; dependency was adjudicated.
DCS created a reunification plan and referred Mother to substance-abuse testing and treatment, visitation, transportation, TERROS, TASC, and other services; some services (parent aide, individual counseling, psychological evaluation, domestic-violence counseling) were conditioned on demonstrating 30 days’ sobriety.
Mother tested positive for methamphetamine after removal, completed only one TERROS intake, did not complete DCS-referred programs during the eight-plus months before the termination hearing, and entered inpatient treatment about one month before the hearing.
DCS moved to terminate Mother’s parental rights under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(3) (prolonged substance abuse) and § 8-533(B)(8) (extended out-of-home placement with failure to remedy circumstances).
The juvenile court found DCS offered a variety of reasonably tailored services, conditioning certain complementary services on 30 days’ sobriety was reasonable, Mother delayed meaningful participation until too late, and termination was in the children’s best interests.
Mother appealed solely arguing DCS failed to make reasonable reunification efforts by conditioning services on 30 days’ sobriety.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DCS made reasonable reunification efforts by conditioning certain services on 30 days’ sobriety	Mother: Conditioning services on 30 days’ sobriety unlawfully withheld needed services and undermined a finding that her substance abuse would continue	DCS: Mother waived the challenge; in any event conditioning was reasonable because complementary services are ineffective if parent is actively using, and DCS provided core services and referrals	Court: Affirmed. Reasonable evidence supported that DCS offered services designed to give a reasonable opportunity for reunification; conditioning some services on sobriety was not an abuse of discretion and Mother delayed participation
Whether termination was in the children’s best interests	(not contested on appeal)	DCS: Continuation of parental relationship would harm children by prolonging foster placement while Mother addressed substance abuse	Court: Affirmed. Record supports finding termination served children’s best interests given Mother’s failure to achieve long-term sobriety and late engagement in treatment

Audra T. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 194 Ariz. 376 (App. 1998) (standard of review for juvenile court findings)
Minh T. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 202 Ariz. 76 (App. 2001) (parental rights are fundamental but not absolute)
Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 246 (App. 2000) (best-interests standard for termination)
Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 193 Ariz. 185 (App. 1999) (DCS must offer services that provide a reasonable possibility of reunification; not required to provide every conceivable service)
Tanya K. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, 240 Ariz. 154 (App. 2016) (DCS not required to undertake futile rehabilitative measures)
Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (App. 2004) (case law on DCS service obligations)
Shawanee S. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 234 Ariz. 174 (App. 2014) (issue-waiver principles where parent failed to raise insufficiency of services below)