Willard E. v. Dcs, 1 CA-JV 16-0540

Father (Willard E.) previously had three children found dependent in Jan 2013 due to domestic violence, methamphetamine use, and unstable housing; children were returned after reunification and the dependency was dismissed in Dec 2013.
Within 18 months Father was arrested for methamphetamine possession, tested positive for meth, and the juvenile court again found the children dependent and placed them in DCS custody; Father was incarcerated thereafter.
DCS provided reunification services (supervised visitation, parent-aide, drug testing/treatment referrals, TASC, TERROS); Father inconsistently participated and missed drug testing; some drug tests were positive for methamphetamine.
Father claimed illness/hospitalizations and alternative testing but produced no medical or testing records and was not found credible by the juvenile court; he also gave unverified claims of employment and housing.
The juvenile court terminated Father’s parental rights finding three statutory grounds (prior dependency, 15 months in out-of-home placement, chronic substance abuse) and that termination was in the children’s best interests; Father appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Father was "currently unable to discharge parental responsibilities" under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(11) (prior dependency)	Father argued he was capable and that hospitalizations and alternative testing explained nonparticipation	DCS argued Father failed drug testing, denied use, failed to participate in treatment, lacked verifiable housing/income	Court held reasonable evidence supported finding Father was currently unable to parent; affirmed.
Whether DCS provided adequate reunification services	Father argued DCS failed to obtain medical/probation records and therefore did not properly assess or provide services	DCS argued it offered multiple services and Father largely failed to participate	Court held DCS provided appropriate services and Father did not consistently participate.
Whether termination was in children’s best interests	Father argued the children were bonded to him and extending services would cause no harm	DCS argued current placement met needs, was adoptable and willing to adopt	Court held termination was in children’s best interests given placement stability and adoptability.
Whether appellate court should reweigh credibility and evidence	Father effectively asked for reweighing to find for him	DCS relied on juvenile court credibility findings and record	Court refused to reweigh evidence and deferred to juvenile court’s credibility determinations.

Jordan C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 223 Ariz. 86 (discusses appellate review and burden of proof in termination cases)
Kent K. v. Bobby M., 210 Ariz. 279 (termination requires best-interests showing by preponderance)
Demetrius L. v. Joshlynn F., 239 Ariz. 1 (best-interests standards: benefit to child or harm if parent not severed)
Bennigno R. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 233 Ariz. 345 (statutory grounds generally negatively affect best-interests inquiry)
Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ. Sec., 196 Ariz. 246 (if termination affirmed on one ground, court need not address others)
Maricopa Cty., Juv. Action No. JS-5894, 145 Ariz. 405 (juvenile court flexibility in assessing parental inability to discharge responsibilities)