In re M.S., 289 N.C. App. 127 (2023), superseding WL 3829185
Held:
Affirmed in Part; Vacated in Part; and Remanded
- Facts: DSS filed a neglect petition for the juveniles based on improper care and supervision and an injurious environment caused by domestic violence, substance use, amber alert notification, and prior TPR of other children based on sexual abuse. Prior to the adjudication hearing, the parents agreed to case plans with DSS that included no contact between the parents, parenting classes, a comprehensive clinical assessment, for mother a domestic violence assessment and classes, and for father sex offender evaluation, drug screens, domestic violence batterer’s assessment, housing, and an employment search. At nonsecure custody, mother and father had one hour of supervised visits a week. Mother attended one visit where no concerns were raised. At the pre-adjudication hearing, no visits were ordered after the court found the children started to show sexualized behaviors and there was a prior TPR based on sexual abuse. The court held an adjudication hearing and adjudicated the children neglected. The court moved to the dispositional hearing. The children were ordered in DSS custody; reunification efforts with the parents were ceased based on prior TPR orders; no visitation was ordered; and a permanency planning hearing was scheduled within 30 days. Both parents appeal. This summary is about the adjudication.
- The neglect adjudication is supported by the findings, which are supported by clear and convincing evidence – specifically social worker and officer testimony of their personal observations of the parents. The social worker's observations were that mother was visibly upset. The officer's observations were of the details of father's arrest, including father's statement to go check on his wife, and the officer's observations of the wife's injuries and statement that her husband had assaulted her. Although one finding did not include the specific date of a domestic violence incident, that omission is not prejudicial.
Category:
Abuse, Neglect, DependencyStage:
AdjudicationTopic:
Neglect