T.H., THE FATHER AND S.D., THE MOTHER v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES
226 So. 3d 915
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2017Background
- Parents (T.H. — Father; S.D. — Mother) had two children at issue: S.H. (b. July 2014) and T.D.H. (b. Nov. 2015). S.H. was sheltered days after birth on allegations of domestic violence and drug use. T.D.H. was sheltered soon after birth in 2015.
- The Department filed dependency and later termination petitions. For S.H., the Department alleged abandonment (§ 39.806(1)(b)) as to the Father. For T.D.H., the Department relied on failure to substantially comply with a case plan (§ 39.806(1)(e)1.).
- The parents missed hearings and were difficult to locate; consents were entered on their behalf at an early adjudicatory stage. The Father later was arrested and incarcerated after an altercation.
- At the termination trial the court found the Department proved the grounds alleged in the petitions and terminated both parents’ rights as to T.D.H. and the Father’s rights as to S.H.
- On appeal the Department and Guardian Ad Litem conceded that termination as to T.D.H. was error because the Department had not obtained an adjudication of dependency nor filed a court-approved case plan (prerequisites for § 39.806(1)(e)). The appellate court accepted that concession and reversed termination as to T.D.H.
- The appellate court affirmed termination of the Father’s parental rights as to S.H., finding clear and convincing evidence of abandonment and that termination was in the child’s manifest best interests and the least restrictive means.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination as to T.D.H. may stand under § 39.806(1)(e)1. (failure to comply with case plan) | Department: § 39.806(1)(e)1. supports termination | Parents: No dependency adjudication or court-filed case plan had been entered for T.D.H. | Reversed — § 39.806(1)(e)1. inapplicable where no adjudication or court‑approved case plan exists (error conceded by Department). |
| Whether unpled grounds (abandonment § 39.806(1)(b) or harm § 39.806(1)(c)) can be deemed tried by implied consent for T.D.H. | Department/GAL: Court may remand or accept implied consent and findings on unpled grounds | Parents: No notice or pleading of those grounds; cannot be adjudicated without proper notice | Court rejected implied-consent remedy — not satisfied that parents had notice; reversed termination as to T.D.H. |
| Whether Father abandoned S.H. under § 39.01(1)/39.806(1)(b) | Department: Father made no significant contributions, had little contact, disappeared, provided no support | Father: Caretaker interfered with bonding; he worked on case plan; transportation issues | Affirmed — abundance of evidence showed abandonment (no regular contact, minimal support, disappearance, confrontational conduct). |
| Whether termination was in S.H.’s manifest best interests and least restrictive means | Department: Termination necessary given lack of bond, caregiver willing to adopt, and Father’s limited compliance | Father: He worked on case plan; termination is not the least restrictive means; not in child's best interest | Affirmed — court found termination was in manifest best interests and was the least restrictive means to protect child given lack of bond and parental noncompliance. |
Key Cases Cited
- A.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 915 So. 2d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (§ 39.806(1)(e) requires prior dependency adjudication; otherwise not a valid ground for termination)
- J.T. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 819 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (§ 39.806(1)(e) applies only when court‑approved reunification case plan exists)
- B.K. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 166 So. 3d 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (party seeking termination must prove statutory ground and that termination is in the manifest best interests; least restrictive means analysis explained)
- K.D. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 132 So. 3d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (manifest best interests analysis focuses on the child’s interests, not parental rights)