Victor B., Elizabeth B. v. Dcs
1 CA-JV 17-0005
| Ariz. Ct. App. | Sep 28, 2017Background
- Mother (born 2012 child) and Father (shared 2014 child) had prior DCS involvement: older child removed in 2013 for Mother's substance abuse, neglect, and unstable housing; reunification occurred in 2014 but both children were removed again after an August/September 2014 domestic-violence incident witnessed by the children.
- After removal, parents received referrals for substance-abuse treatment, domestic-violence counseling, parenting classes, and parent-aide services; both enrolled at Potter’s House (a non-contracted provider) after being told DCS would not pay for that provider.
- Parents inconsistently participated: Mother completed domestic-violence treatment (July 2015) but was later discharged from services for nonattendance; Father repeatedly failed or refused substance-abuse and parenting services, had further domestic-violence incidents, and tested positive for methamphetamine during the severance hearing.
- DCS moved to terminate parental rights in December 2015; after a multi-day hearing in November 2016 the superior court terminated Mother’s rights to both children under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(8)(c) (15 months’ time-in-care) and terminated Father’s rights to the younger child under § 8-533(B)(8)(c) and § 8-533(B)(3) (prolonged drug abuse).
- On appeal, parents challenged DCS’s diligence in offering reunification services and the court’s findings that they could not remedy the circumstances and that severance was in the children’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DCS made diligent efforts to provide reunification services to Father | Father: DCS failed to provide adequate services and assessment; psychologist was biased | DCS: offered mental-health, domestic-violence, substance-abuse, parent-aide services and transportation; father declined/failed to complete them | Held: DCS made diligent efforts; record supports termination under § 8-533(B)(8)(c) |
| Whether DCS made diligent efforts to provide reunification services to Mother (Potter’s House issue) | Mother: DCS should have paid for Potter’s House after her insurance lapsed | DCS: warned parents Potter’s House was non-contracted and offered equivalent services at contracted provider plus transportation | Held: DCS made diligent efforts; failure to fund a non-contracted provider did not render services inadequate |
| Whether parents were unable to remedy circumstances and likely to be incapable of proper parental care in the near future | Parents: given more time they could complete services and remedy conditions | DCS: continued domestic violence, drug use, noncompliance with services show persistent risk | Held: Court reasonably found both parents unlikely to be capable of proper parental care in near future (supporting § 8-533(B)(8)(c)) |
| Whether severance was in the children’s best interests despite bonding with Mother | Mother: children bonded with her; termination harms them | DCS: removal benefits—protects children from drugs, domestic violence and instability in home | Held: Termination was in children’s best interests; harms of continuing relationship outweighed bonding |
Key Cases Cited
- Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 246 (discusses parental rights as fundamental but subject to termination under statutory grounds)
- Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (court must find termination is in child’s best interests by preponderance)
- Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 207 Ariz. 43 (standard of review for termination—abuse of discretion)
- Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 203 Ariz. 278 (appellate deference to superior court’s factual findings)
- Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 193 Ariz. 185 (defines DCS’s duty to make diligent efforts to provide services)
- Desiree S. v. Dep't of Child Safety, 235 Ariz. 532 (severance improper where parent successfully completed services)
- Marina P. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 214 Ariz. 326 (circumstances causing out-of-home placement judged as of severance time)
- Jennifer B. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ. Sec., 189 Ariz. 553 (best-interests standard: benefit from removal or detriment from continuation)
- Maricopa County Juv. Action No. JD-561, 131 Ariz. 25 (parental right to proper physical and emotional care)