In re R.H., ___ N.C. App. ___ (September 3, 2024)
Held:
Affirmed
- Facts: DSS filed a neglect and dependency petition and obtained nonsecure custody of a newborn based on incidents of domestic violence between Mother and Father, including Father’s violent assault of Mother while the child was in utero. Mother’s four other children were previously adjudicated neglected due to domestic violence, unstable housing, and inappropriate care and supervision; Mother’s rights to three of the children were ultimately terminated (the fourth child, the only other previous child of both Mother and Father, passed away post-adjudication). The child at issue was adjudicated neglected and dependent and ordered to remain in DSS custody. The court ordered a safety plan to work towards unsupervised visitation with Mother. The first permanency planning order found Mother had made significant progress on her case plan, was engaging in services and cooperating with DSS and the GAL, and granted Mother a mix of supervised and unsupervised visitation. A later permanency planning order changed the primary plan to adoption, finding that while Mother was engaging in services and cooperating, Mother was acting inconsistently with the child’s health and safety, failed to consistently attend visitation with the child, and that there had been domestic violence incidents with Father at Mother’s home. The trial court ordered the GAL to file a termination petition. The GAL petitioned to terminate Mother and Father’s parental rights on grounds of neglect; willfully leaving the child in foster care for more than 12 months without reasonable progress to correct the conditions that led to their removal; willful failure to pay a reasonable portion of the child’s cost of care; and Mother’s parental rights to another child had been involuntarily terminated and Mother lacks the ability or willingness to establish a safe home. The court adjudicated each ground and found termination in the child’s best interest. Mother appeals, challenging the findings and the grounds adjudicated.
- The adjudication of termination grounds is reviewed to determine whether the conclusions of law are supported by adequate findings and whether the findings are supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.
- G.S. 7B-1101(a)(1) allows for the termination of a parent’s rights if the parent “neglects their child such that the child meets the statutory definition of a ‘neglected juvenile.’ ” Sl. Op. at 6. G.S. 7B-101(15) defines a neglected juvenile to include a juvenile “whose parent ‘[d]oes not provide proper care, supervision, or discipline[,]’ or ‘[c]reates or allows to be created a living environment that is injurious to the juvenile’s welfare.’ ” Sl. Op. at 6, quoting G.S. 7B-101(15)(a), (e). When the child and parent have been separated for a period of time, neglect can be established by evidence of past neglect and the likelihood of future neglect by the parent if the child were to be returned to the parent’s care. The trial court must consider “evidence of changed circumstances occurring between the period of past neglect and the time of the termination hearing.” Sl. Op. at 6 (citation omitted). The court may describe testimony but must “ultimately make its own findings, resolving any material disputes.” Sl. Op. at 8 (citation omitted). “The trial court ‘determines the weight to be given the testimony and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom.’ ” Sl. Op. at 10 (citation omitted).
- Portions of the trial court’s findings are improper recitations of testimony with no indication the trial court evaluated witness credibility and are disregarded.
- Challenged findings regarding Mother’s ongoing relationship with Father and intentionally meeting Father with the child prior to the TPR hearing are supported by the evidence. The trial court found Mother’s claims that the meetings with Father prior to the TPR hearing were unplanned and unintentional were not credible based on findings that Mother had a long history of hiding information of domestic violence and prior orders questioned Mother’s truthfulness; concerns for Mother’s truthfulness at the TPR hearing; and Mother’s own testimony regarding the meetings with Father prior to the TPR hearing. The trial court reasonably inferred Mother and Father’s relationship was ongoing based on evidence including Mother giving birth to another child with Father after the child at issue; testimony of law enforcement responding to a domestic violence incident stating the belief Father lived in the home; testimony of the GAL stating Father’s car had been seen at the residence over time during the life of the case; and Mother admitting to taking the child on an out of state trip and to another outing where they met Father days before the TPR hearing.
- The trial court properly determined that Mother’s parental rights were subject to termination based on neglect in that the child was previously neglected and there was a likelihood of repetition of neglect if the child was returned to Mother’s care. Although Mother made progress on her case plan, she did not end the violent relationship with Father, which is the basis for why the child came into DSS. Mother refused to end the relationship with Father, the domestic violence continued, and Mother brought the child to meet with Father up until the time of the TPR hearing.
Category:
Termination of Parental RightsStage:
AdjudicationTopic:
Neglect