In re B.C., ___ N.C. App. ___ (March 19, 2025)
Held:
Affirmed in Part; Vacated in Part.
- Facts: DSS became involved with the family when Mother reported to the police that Father physically and sexually abused their two children. Mother told the police that she became concerned about the children sleeping with their Father upon discovering that the children had been masturbating. During forensic interviews with the DSS investigator, neither child reported sexual abuse or domestic violence. Though the investigator did not find Mother’s report credible, DSS assisted Mother in obtaining a DVPO and entered a safety plan with Mother. Mother then made, and shared with DSS, an audio recording of herself talking to the children about the allegations against their Father. DSS became concerned that Mother was coaching the children and advised Mother not to ask the children leading questions about the allegations against Father. Mother subsequently took video recordings of the two children masturbating and shared the video with DSS in order to request another forensic interview with one of the children. After the DSS investigator declined, Mother received a referral for medical examinations and forensic interviews from a pediatrician’s office. During these interviews one of the children stated Father would “rub his private[s]” while she was sleeping with him, and the other reported that Father sometimes punched or hit her. Both children again denied being touched inappropriately and reported their belief that the examination was a result of the parents getting a divorce. DSS’s investigation later revealed that six months prior to Mother’s police report, Mother communicated with a “spiritual adviser” where she was told her children had been sexually abused in their past lives and the resulting trauma could only be relieved through orgasm. Forensic investigations in the civil custody case resulted in concern for the consistency of the allegations against Father and the potential damage to the children’s relationship with their Father. While the investigation into the allegations against Father were ongoing, DSS ultimately filed a petition alleging the children abused, neglected, and dependent based on Mother’s behavior upon learning that Mother testified in the civil custody case describing the video recording of the children masturbating and a “ceremony” she conducted with the children where photos of Father were burned. The children were adjudicated on all three grounds. The trial court ordered that the children remain in the custody of DSS and kinship placement. Mother appeals the trial court’s adjudication and disposition order.
- Abuse, neglect, and dependency adjudications are reviewed on appeal to “determine whether the findings are supported by clear, cogent and convincing evidence and the findings support the conclusions of law.” Sl. Op. at 6. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.
- A dependent juvenile is one who is “in need of assistance or placement because . . . the juvenile’s parent . . . is unable to provide for the juvenile’s care or supervision and lacks an appropriate alternative child care arrangement.” G.S. 7B-101(9). The challenged finding that both parents lacked the ability to provide an appropriate alternative child care option is disregarded. The record does not contain evidence of either parents’ offer or lack of alternative child care options for the children. The children were in kinship placement at the time of the adjudication hearings and that placement was continued at disposition. Without making findings regarding the availability of alternative child care arrangements, the dependency adjudication is unsupported and that portion of the order is vacated.
- Mother’s only challenge to the disposition order was that the order was based on the unsupported and erroneous adjudicatory findings. Having affirmed the abuse and neglect adjudications, the disposition order is left undisturbed.
Category:
Abuse, Neglect, DependencyStage:
AdjudicationTopic:
Dependency