Strickland v. Strickland
330 Ga. App. 879
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Mother lost temporary custody in 2006 after a police raid; maternal grandparents obtained temporary custody and were extended guardianship through 2010; grandparents later petitioned for permanent custody in superior court.
- While grandparents had custody, they limited the mother’s visitation; mother maintained ongoing visitation (weekends, holidays, summers) and a continued bond with the children.
- Mother has bipolar disorder and past drug use but completed substance-abuse treatment, passed recent drug screens, is in counseling, and works from home; she and her sister hold interests in a family partnership that generates income.
- Grandparents had prior DFCS investigations for corporal punishment; grandfather has a history of striking children (including L.T.), and L.T. has significant emotional/behavioral issues (depression, enuresis, encopresis, therapy need).
- GAL described the family as dysfunctional but recommended continued placement with grandparents temporarily to avoid abrupt harm; trial court found children would suffer long-term emotional harm if returned to mother and awarded grandparents permanent custody.
- Mother appealed, arguing grandparents failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that placement with her would cause physical or significant, long-term emotional harm.
Issues
| Issue | Mother’s Argument | Grandparents’ Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether grandparents overcame statutory presumption favoring parental custody | Grandparents failed to show clear-and-convincing evidence of physical or significant long-term emotional harm if children returned to mother | Grandparents argued children would suffer long-term emotional harm if returned to mother and permanency with them was in children’s best interest | Reversed: grandparents did not meet the clear-and-convincing burden to rebut the presumption; mother’s custody right prevails |
| Whether mother’s past issues justify terminating parental custody | Mother contends she remedied prior problems (stable home, employment, sobriety, treatment) and will address children’s needs | Grandparents relied on mother’s past instability, sporadic interest, and children’s current bond with them | Court found evidence mother addressed prior issues and no proof she would fail to address children’s psychological needs |
| Whether stress of custody change equates to significant long-term harm | Mother: short-term stress is not sufficient to rebut presumption; abrupt change causes harm, not reunification per se | Grandparents: change to mother’s custody would harm children’s emotional stability | Court: transient stress does not satisfy statutory standard; abrupt change might harm but is not adequate proof of long-term harm |
| Whether evidence supported permanent custody to grandparents on best-interest basis | Mother: burden to rebut presumption not met, so best-interest inquiry unnecessary | Grandparents: permanent custody was in children’s best interest due to stability and bond | Court did not decide best-interest because grandparents failed to overcome presumption; reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Clark v. Wade, 273 Ga. 587 (2001) (third-party must prove by clear and convincing evidence that parent’s custody would cause physical or significant long-term emotional harm)
- Harris v. Snelgrove, 290 Ga. 181 (2011) (parental custody preference cannot be displaced solely for better material or educational advantages)
- Whitehead v. Myers, 311 Ga. App. 680 (2011) (appellate review views evidence in light most favorable to trial court)
- Burke v. King, 254 Ga. App. 351 (2002) (reversed third-party custody where clear-and-convincing showing of long-term harm was lacking)