Tourison v. Pepper, 51 A.3d 470

DFS became involved after the birth; child placed with Mother's aunt as guardian with parental petition to regain custody later.
Mother moved toward custody/self-care after counseling and visits; in 2010 she petitioned for custody and to rescind guardianship, guardians opposed.
Family Court denied Mother’s petitions and found guardians’ visitation petition moot; Father opposed but did not seek custody.
Guardian status remained pending; Family Court conducted a two-day hearing and preserved guardians’ position.
This appeal asks whether a fit parent should prevail on rescission of guardianship and what standard applies to overcome a fit parent presumption.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a fit-parent presumption applies to terminating guardianship	Tourison entitled to presumption in her favor	Guardians may overcome presumption with harm evidence	Yes; presumption applies and guardians must show clear harm to defeat it.
What standard applies to terminating guardianship when parent is fit	Clear and convincing evidence of harm required for termination	Best interests analysis may be used if no harm shown	Guardians must prove clear and convincing evidence of physical or emotional harm to deny termination.
Did the guardians prove harm to deny termination given Mother’s fitness	Mother is a fit parent; child would be safe and happy with her	Guardians argue termination would harm child	No harm proven; termination should be granted.

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parents have a fundamental right to care for their children; presumption for fit parents in custody decisions)
Boddie v. Daniels, 288 Ga. 143 (Ga. 2010) (guardianship termination requires clear and convincing evidence of harm to child if custody returned to biological parent)
In re D.I.S., 249 P.3d 775 (Colo. 2010) (parental rights presumption and high bar for third-party interference)