402 S.E.2d 281 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1991
Based upon an allegation that appellant-mother’s child was deprived, appellee-Georgia Department of Human Resources sought the termination of her parental rights pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-81 (b) (4). The trial court conducted a hearing, found that the child was deprived, and terminated appellant’s parental rights. Appellant appeals from the termination order.
1. “ ‘The juvenile court’s termination of appellant’s parental rights must be based upon clear and convincing evidence which supports the following findings: “(i) The child is a deprived child . . .; (ii) The lack of proper parental care or control by [appellant] is the cause of the child’s status as deprived; (iii) Such cause of deprivation is likely to continue or will not likely be remedied; and (iv) The continued deprivation will cause or is likely to cause serious physical, mental, emotional, or moral harm to the child.” OCGA § 15-11-81 (b) (4) (A). If clear and convincing evidence of these elements exists, the juvenile court must then have given consideration to the best interests of the child before it ordered the termination of appellant’s parental rights. See OCGA § 15-11-81 (a). . . . ‘ “On review of such a decision (terminating parental rights), the standard is whether[,] after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee, any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the natural parents’ rights to custody have been lost. (Cit.)” [Cit.]’ [Cit.]” In the Interest of K. P. E., 196 Ga. App. 759, 760 (397 SE2d 39) (1990).
2. A ground of objection to the juvenile court’s consideration of certain evidence which was not raised below is waived and will not be considered on appeal. See In the Interest of J. L. Y., 184 Ga. App. 254, 258 (3) (361 SE2d 246) (1987); In the Interest of D. S., 176 Ga. App. 482, 485 (2) (336 SE2d 358) (1985); Brown v. Dept, of Human Resources, 157 Ga. App. 106 (1) (276 SE2d 155) (1981).
3. Appellant urges that it was error to terminate her parental rights without her first having been provided an opportunity to rehabilitate herself.
Appellant has cited no authority for the proposition that the opportunity for rehabilitation is a prerequisite to the termination of her parental rights. In full compliance with applicable statutory requirements of OCGA § 15-11-81 (b) (4) (A) (iii), the juvenile court found that the deprivation of the child resulting from appellant’s parental unfitness is likely to continue or will not likely be remedied, and there is sufficient clear and convincing evidence to support the findings in this regard. See In re A. N.Y., 181 Ga. App. 499 (353 SE2d 8) (1987); In the Interest of J. I. H., 191 Ga. App. 848, 850 (3) (383 SE2d 349) (1989). “ Tn a case such as this, a plea of additional time to improve is without force to overcome the proof of unrelieved detriment already suffered by the child where there is no indication but the promise to suggest hope of improvement. [Cits.]’ [Cit.]” In the Interest of B. L., 196 Ga. App. 807, 810 (3) (397 SE2d 156) (1990). See also In
4. After the termination of parental rights, the juvenile court “shall first attempt to place the child with the child’s extended family or with a person related to the child by blood or marriage.” OCGA § 15-11-90 (a) (1). However, there is no comparable statutory provision which mandates that, prior to the termination of parental rights and as a prerequisite thereto, the juvenile court must make a similar attempt. See In the Interest of P. F. J., 174 Ga. App. 47, 48 (2) (329 SE2d 194) (1985). As noted, there is clear and convincing evidence to authorize the juvenile court’s findings that appellant was responsible for the deprivation of the child and that her parental unfitness is likely to continue or is not likely to be remedied. Compare In the Interest of K. E. B., 190 Ga. App. 121 (378 SE2d 171) (1989). There is nothing in the record which otherwise casts doubt on the determination that a complete severance of appellant’s parental rights was appropriate. Compare Jones v. Dept, of Human Resources, 168 Ga. App. 915, 916 (310 SE2d 753) (1983).
Judgment affirmed.