Weathers v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
2014 Ark. App. 142
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- DHS removed infant D.V. after an anonymous report that mother Linda Vondran (IQ ~63) was unable to care for the newborn; Linda had suicidal ideation and was hospitalized in a psychiatric ward. Father Richard Weathers had a criminal history including a guilty plea for aggravated assault (knife) against Linda while she was pregnant.
- Court entered emergency custody, adjudicated D.V. dependent-neglected, and ordered psychological evaluations, DNA testing, supervised visitation for Linda, and no contact for Richard pending release.
- DHS provided reunification services (therapy referrals, parenting classes, drug screens, financial support for foster care, etc.); courts found limited participation and continuing safety concerns, including Linda’s intent to remain with Richard despite domestic violence.
- Permanency goal changed from reunification to adoption after findings of lack of material progress and risk to the child; psychological reports diagnosed Linda with borderline intellectual functioning and Richard with antisocial traits and borderline intellectual functioning.
- DHS petitioned to terminate both parents’ rights; at the termination hearing evidence showed ongoing domestic violence, limited benefit from services, nondisclosure of living arrangements, and expert opinions that further services were unlikely to enable safe reunification.
- The circuit court terminated both parents’ rights, finding statutory grounds (including "other factors" and aggravated circumstances) proven by clear and convincing evidence and that termination was in D.V.’s best interest; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court should have ensured ADA accommodations for Linda | Linda: court/DHS failed to provide reasonable ADA accommodations for her mental impairment, denying meaningful services | DHS/court: issue not preserved; court acknowledged disabilities and appointed an ad litem; no flagrant error requiring sua sponte relief | Court: ADA objection waived; no Wicks exception — no flagrant error; termination affirmed on other statutory ground |
| Whether DHS provided meaningful reunification services to Linda | Linda: DHS did virtually nothing and failed to provide tailored services for her disability | DHS: provided referrals and services; Linda failed to participate and refused to leave abusive relationship | Court: Even if some services were lacking, "other factors" ground supports termination because Linda manifested incapacity/indifference (moved in with abuser, dismissed protection order) |
| Whether statutory grounds for terminating Richard’s rights were proved | Richard: DHS failed to prove noncompliance with case plan or statutory grounds | DHS: Richard refused meaningful counseling, minimized violence, had criminal history and test results indicating services unlikely to help | Court: Aggravated circumstances (little likelihood services will result in reunification) proven by clear and convincing evidence; termination affirmed |
| Whether termination was in child’s best interest | Linda and Richard: sought more time/services; argued potential placements/support | DHS: child is adoptable; returning to parents would endanger child given mental impairments, domestic violence, and parents’ noncompliance | Court: Found termination in D.V.’s best interest based on adoptability and risk to health/safety; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Pratt v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 413 S.W.3d 261 (Ark. App. 2012) (standard for Wicks exception and deference to circuit court credibility findings in termination cases)
- Wicks v. State, 606 S.W.2d 366 (Ark. 1980) (contemporaneous-objection rule and narrow exceptions requiring flagrant error)
- Yarborough v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 240 S.W.3d 626 (Ark. App. 2006) (termination requires more than mere prediction that reunification services will fail)
- Dawson v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 391 S.W.3d 352 (Ark. App. 2011) (proof of a single statutory ground is sufficient for termination)
- Tucker v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 389 S.W.3d 1 (Ark. App. 2011) (completion of case plan must actually make parent capable of caring for child)
- Gilmore v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 379 S.W.3d 501 (Ark. App. 2010) (issues not raised at termination hearing are waived)
- Sowell v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 241 S.W.3d 767 (Ark. App. 2006) (ADA accommodation principles for parents with mental impairments)
- Flanagan v. State, 243 S.W.3d 866 (Ark. 2006) (undeveloped appellate arguments may be declined from consideration)