Treasure Morris v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children
586 S.W.3d 203
Ark. Ct. App.2019Background
- DHS removed two young sons (TM, age 4; JM, age 2) in June 2017 for environmental neglect (trash, dirty diapers, pet feces, exposed cords, roach infestation) after prior protective-services involvement.
- Parents briefly regained custody for a trial placement in July 2017, but DHS removed the children again in mid‑August 2017 after inspections found bug bites, bruising/rash, urine/feces in beds, exposed electrical cords, and generally squalid conditions.
- DHS provided more than a year of remedial services (homemaker aides, pest control funds, parenting classes, counseling, supplies), but the home repeatedly reverted to an unsafe, unclean condition; additional photographs shortly before the December 2018 termination hearing showed ongoing problems (pet waste, mold, piled items, dirty stove).
- The children were adjudicated dependent-neglected, placed with foster parents who were interested in adopting; both boys were thriving in care and had medical/therapy needs (JM: digestive disorder and swallow/speech therapy; TM: allergies).
- The Faulkner County Circuit Court terminated Mother Treasure Morris’s parental rights on the statutory “failure to remedy” ground and found termination was in the children’s best interest; Morris appealed and the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Morris) | Defendant's Argument (DHS/Child's Attorney) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS proved statutory ground—"failure to remedy" under Ark. Code § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i)(a) | Morris: She remedied conditions by moving to a new residence and improving cleanliness; progress was sustainable. | DHS: Although sporadic improvements occurred, conditions were not sustained despite meaningful services over a year. | Affirmed: clear-and-convincing evidence of failure to remedy; court not clearly erroneous. |
| Whether termination was in the children’s best interest (potential harm and adoptability) | Morris: Children were never actually injured prior to removal; potential harm is speculative. | DHS: Persistent environmental neglect created a realistic potential for future harm; foster parents willing to adopt. | Affirmed: termination in best interest—children adoptable and potential harm supported. |
| Standard of review / weighing evidence | Morris: Asked court to credit her evidence of improvement. | DHS: Trial court credibility determinations and weighing of sustained progress justified. | Appellate review de novo but defers to trial court credibility; no clear error found. |
Key Cases Cited
- Houseman v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 491 S.W.3d 153 (Ark. App. 2016) (two-step framework for termination: statutory ground then best interest; standard of review and clear-and-convincing burden)
- Ross v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 529 S.W.3d 692 (Ark. App. 2017) (potential future harm need not be concretely proven; best-interest analysis may consider potential harm)
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 40 S.W.3d 286 (Ark. 2001) (environmental-neglect cases where termination was upheld)
- Trout v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 197 S.W.3d 486 (Ark. 2004) (discusses sufficiency of improvements and appellate review in termination cases)
- Browning v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 157 S.W.3d 540 (Ark. App. 2004) (environmental neglect as a basis for termination)
- Glover v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 577 S.W.3d 13 (Ark. App. 2019) (appellate court will not reweigh evidence; affirms deference to trial-court credibility findings)