In re E.M., 249 N.C. App. 44 (2016)

·         In both Chapter 50 custody and 7B juvenile actions, “[b]ecause the decision to remove a child from a natural parent’s custody ‘must not be lightly undertaken[,]… [the] determination that a parent’s conduct is inconsistent with… her constitutionally protected status must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.” [citing Adams v. Tessener, 354 N.C. 57, 63 (2001)]. The court must make clear that it applied the clear and convincing standard when determining whether the parent’s conduct has been inconsistent with her constitutionally-protected status.