Williams v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
2014 Ark. App. 481
Ark. Ct. App.2014Background
- DHS placed six Williams children on a 72-hour hold and the circuit court adjudicated them dependent-neglected.
- The four youngest children remained in foster care; the two oldest were placed with a maternal aunt and uncle.
- DHS petitioned to terminate Williams's parental rights to all six, seeking adoption for the four youngest and permanent placement for the two oldest.
- At the termination hearing, an adoption specialist testified the four youngest were very likely to be adopted; there was no evidence about the two oldest’s adoptability.
- The circuit court terminated Williams's parental rights to all six, including the two oldest, citing best-interest considerations that allegedly included adoptability.
- On appeal, Williams challenges the best-interest ruling for the two oldest, arguing lack of adoptability evidence renders termination erroneous; the court affirms as to the four youngest and reverses/remands as to the two oldest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is adoptability a mandatory element of the best-interest analysis? | Williams: lack of adoptability evidence for two oldest defeats best-interest. | Department: adoptability is only a consideration, not required. | Adoptability is a consideration; absence requires additional support or finding for decision to stand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grant v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 636 (Ark. App. 2010) (adoptability is a consideration, not a requirement)
- Welch v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 378 S.W.3d 290 (Ark. App. 2010) (standard for reversal when best-interest finding not supported by evidence)
- J.T. v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 947 S.W.2d 761 (Ark. 1997) (two-step termination process: unfitness and best-interest)
- McFarland v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 210 S.W.3d 143 (Ark. App. 2005) (no need to prove every factor by clear and convincing evidence; must show overall clear and convincing support for best-interest)
- Haynes v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 2010 Ark. App. 28 (Ark. App. 2010) (adoptability as a consideration must be supported by other favorable factors)