Wright v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
576 S.W.3d 537
Ark. Ct. App.2019Background
- DHS removed Wright’s four children after allegations of physical abuse, neglect, and parental unfitness; the children were adjudicated dependent-neglected and reunification services were ordered.
- Over ~34 months DHS provided services (parenting classes, drug assessment, counseling, trial home placement, visitation); Wright had intermittent compliance but a persistent pattern of instability (multiple homes, jobs, vehicle/license issues, unpaid fines).
- A trial home placement was attempted for BW, AW, and EW but was terminated after behavioral concerns, loss of Wright’s housing/employment, and failure to follow through with counseling and visits.
- Subsequent placement with relatives ended after an adult in that home slapped BW; BW and EW returned to foster care; DHS sought termination of Wright’s parental rights to BW, AW, and EW.
- At the termination hearing DHS proceeded on aggravated-circumstances grounds and best-interest; testimony from caseworkers, therapist, and CASA described Wright’s inability to sustain stability and emotional harm to the children; two children refused contact with Wright.
- The circuit court terminated parental rights, finding aggravated circumstances (little likelihood services would achieve reunification) and that termination was in the children’s best interest; the court’s order was affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds for termination (aggravated circumstances) were proved | Wright: her periods of stability (16–23 months) show ability to parent; evidence insufficient to prove little likelihood services would work | DHS: longstanding, repeated instability, failed trial placement, and lack of sustained compliance show little likelihood of successful reunification | Court: Aggravated circumstances proven by clear and convincing evidence; instability and failed trial placement fatal to reunification prospects |
| Whether termination was in the children’s best interest | Wright: termination not warranted; she maintained recent housing/job/transportation and wants reunification | DHS: children need permanency; risk of physical/emotional harm if returned given Wright’s instability; children adoptable | Court: Best interest satisfied—children adoptable and would be at risk of harm if returned |
| Whether DHS provided inadequate services to Wright (failure to assist with housing/letters) | Wright: DHS did little to address housing/financial instability and delayed HUD letter; lack of services contributed to failure | DHS: Offered extensive services throughout case; lack of family therapy resulted from children’s refusal, not DHS inaction | Court: DHS’s efforts sufficient for aggravated-circumstances finding; failure-to-provide-services claim rejected |
| Whether recent short-term stability (6 months) defeats termination | Wright: recent 6 months of stability demonstrates current ability to parent | DHS: Wright’s history shows inability to sustain stability; short-term stability insufficient for permanency needs | Court: Six months insufficient given pattern; children’s need for long-term stability overrides late improvements |
Key Cases Cited
- Pine v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 379 S.W.3d 703 (Ark. App. 2010) (standard of review and clear-and-convincing proof in TPR appeals)
- Dinkins v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 40 S.W.3d 286 (Ark. 2001) (deference to trial court credibility findings in child-placement matters)
- Selsor v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 516 S.W.3d 314 (Ark. App. 2017) (failure to provide appropriate housing contrary to child’s best interest)
- Gonzalez v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 555 S.W.3d 915 (Ark. App. 2018) (failed trial placement supports potential-harm finding)
- Hooks v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 536 S.W.3d 666 (Ark. App. 2017) (proof of a single statutory ground suffices for termination)
- Willis v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 538 S.W.3d 842 (Ark. App. 2017) (aggravated-circumstances finding does not require proof DHS provided particular services)
- Miller v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 492 S.W.3d 113 (Ark. App. 2016) (caseworker testimony that a child is adoptable can support adoptability finding)