Case Title: MATTER OF M M

Citation: 

Docket Number: 81-472

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1982-09-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
NO. 81-472 I N THE SUPREME COURT O F T H E STATE O F M O N T A N A 1982 I N THE M A T T E R O F M.M. , Youth i n Need o f Care. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e Fourth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County o f Missoula, The Honorable John S. Henson, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Ann C. German, U o f M School o f Law, Missoula, Montana For Petitioner/Kespondent, S t a t e : Robert L. Deschamps, 111, County Attorney, Missoula, Montana R u s s e l l E. C a t e r , Dept. o f S.R.S, Helena, Montana Terry A. Wallace, Missoula, )lantana (For R. M . ) For Guardian A d Litem: John Riddiough, Missoula, Montana F i l e d : / L Submitted on B r i e f s : A p r i l 8 , 1982 Decided: September 9 , 1982 Mr. Chief Juscice Prank I . Haswell delivered the Opinion of the Court. Following a series of hearings in a child abuse and neglect proceeding, the District Court of Missoula County determined that M.M. was a youth in need of care and awarded her father permanent custody with specified visitation rights granted her mother. The mother appeals. We affirm. M.M. is the only child of the marriage. She was sixteen-months-old at the time of the District Court's order from which this appeal is taken. Following the birth of M.M. a stressful marital situation for the mother developed caused primarily by the couple's deteriorating financial situation and their inability to communicate effectively with one another. As a result, the mother began to take out her irritation on M.M. by yelling and screaming at her, shaking her crib and walker, and slapping her. The father did not say or do anything to ease the situation. On August 29, 1988, the mother went to the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services in Missoula to seek help in caring for the infant. M.M. was placed in foster care with the consent of her mother and father. The mother was placed in a counseling program at the Western Montana Regional Community Health Center. On September 8, 1980, the Missoula County attorney filed a petition for temporary investigative authority and protective services. The District Court granted the petition and appointed a guardian ad litem for P4.M. Shortly thereafter the parents separated and eventu- ally divorce proceedings were filed. The mother continued the counseling program for approximately six months and periodic reports were made to the court by a social worker and two clinical psychologists. In the meantime, both the mother and father filed motions to dismiss the state's temporary investigative authority because a custody hearing was pending in the collateral divorce proceedings. On March 6, 1981, the parents, the guardian ad litem, the Department of Social and Rehabilita- tion Services and the attorneys for all parties stipulated in writing that the motions of the parents for temporary custody of M.M. and dismissal of the petitions for temporary investigative authority were withdrawn, that M.M. was a youth in need of care, that M.M. would remain in foster care pending the dispositional hearing, and that a dispositional hearing would be held on March 31, 1981. On March 31 the hearing commenced and four witnesses testified: Linda Walrath, a social worker for SRS; Dr. Dean Biesemeyer, a clinical psychologist; Dr. H . A. Walters, a clinical psychologist; and Diane Haddon, a psychiatric social worker. Diane Haddon testified in substance that during some eighteen sessions of counseling the mother had gained signi- ficantly in her ability to respond to M.M. Is needs, had become more confident and relaxed with M.M. and in her mothering abilities, and had increased her ability to handle stress to the point where the witness no longer saw a risk of abusive behavior by the mother toward M . M . Dr. Biesemeyer stated that in his opinion the mother had made progress in handling her personal problems but had not resolved them. He testified that the mother's problems were emotional upset and turmoil that gets out of control under stress to the point where she can no longer be respon- sible to the child. Dr. Biesemeyer testified in substance that if W.M. were placed in the mother's custody, the mother would require a strong supportive home environment with her parents or stepparents, attendance at parenting classes, monitoring by SRS, and continuing psychotherapy. He stated that among other things, the mother's problems are related to a family history of abuse. Ur . Biesemeyer testified that the father 's problems involved an apparent inability to meet the emotional and aesthetic needs of M.M., a passive attitude in his relation- ship to the mother, and perhaps a low IQ. Dr. Walters' testimony and opinions concerning the mother paralleled those of Dr. Biesemeyer. He did not conduct an examination or evaluation of the father. Linda Walrath testified that the mother demonstrated appropriate behavior toward M.M. during her home visits and that both parents cared for M.M. and used appropriate disci- pline toward M.M. She recommended that the mother receive custody of M.M. and that the father receive liberal visita- tion rights. The basis of this recommendation was that the mother recognized her problem, sought help at the risk of losing the child, participated in the counseling sessions and tried to implement the recommendations in order to become a better mother, while the father failed to recognize that a problem existed and remained passive. The hearing was continued on April 15. At that time the court heard testimony from the mother, her mother, and social workers Miriam Morgan and Diane Haddon. The hearing was again continued to July 13. In the meantime the visitation schedule of each of the p a r e n t s with M.M. was modified, f o s t e r c a r e was e l i m i n a t e d i n favor of M.M. s t a y i n g a l t e r n a t e l y with each p a r e n t f o r four-day p e r i o d s under SRS s u p e r v i s i o n , and t h e s o c i a l worker a s s i g n e d t o t h e c a s e was changed from Linda Walrath t o C a r o l LaCasse. A t t h e h e a r i n g on J u l y 13, t h e f o l l o w i n g p e r s o n s t e s t i f i e d : t h e mother and her s t e p f a t h e r , t h e f a t h e r and h i s mother, s o c i a l workers Linda Walrath and Carol LaCasse, and Cassandra Kay S c h m i l l , a neighbor. Carol LaCasse conducted home v i s i t s with t h e mother and M.M. on June 26, J u l y 2 and J u l y 9. She t e s t i f i e d t h a t on t h e f i r s t v i s i t t h i n g s went q u i t e w e l l . On t h e second v i s i t , t h e mother e x h i b i t e d a l o t of p h y s i c a l d i s c i p l i n e toward M.M., s l a p p i n g her hands s i x t o e i g h t times, spanking h e r , t h r e a t e n i n g her w i t h t h e back of h e r hand, r o l l i n g up a newspaper and h i t t i n g her hands, g e t t i n g i n t o a power s t r u g g l e w i t h M.M., and e x e r c i s i n g i n c o n s i s t e n t d i s c i p l i n e . T h i s caused M.M. t o f l i n c h b e f o r e t h e d i s c i p l i n e . LaCasse t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e mother was t h e o n l y p a r e n t w i t h any p o t e n t i a l f o r abusing M.M. and t h a t t h e f a t n e r e x h i b i t e d proper behavior toward M.M., o f f e r i n g h e r s t i m u l a - t i o n , guidance and a p p r o p r i a t e d i s c i p l i n e . She d i d n o t b e l i e v e t h e f a t h e r had any p o t e n t i a l f o r abusing M.M. She recommended t h a t custody be awarded t h e f a t h e r s i n c e he was t h e b e t t e r p a r e n t . Linda Walrath, t h e s o c i a l worker who had recommended t h a t custody be g i v e n t o t h e mother a t t h e March 31 h e a r i n g , t e s t i f i e d t h a t s h e would change her p r i o r recommendation i f t h e mother l o s t her s u p p o r t system o r behaved i n a p p r o p r i - a t e l y toward M.M. The f a t h e r ' s neighbor f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s , Cassandra Kay Schmill , t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r had done b a b y s i t t i n g f o r h e r f o r s i x y e a r s s i n c e her c h i l d r e n were i n f a n t s . She had observed him being a f f e c t i o n a t e and p r o v i d i n g g u i d a n c e , d i s c i p l i n e and s t i m u l a t i o n t o them. On J u l y 20 t h e D i s t r i c t Court e n t e r e d e x t e n s i v e f i n d - i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s of law and an o r d e r . I t g r a n t e d permanent c u s t o d y of M.M. t o t h e f a t h e r , o r d e r e d t h e f a t h e r t o e n r o l l i n a p a r e n t s k i l l s t r a i n i n g program and c o u n s e l i n g a s deemed n e c e s s a r y by SRS, provided t h a t SRS would r e t a i n i n v e s t i g a t i v e a u t h o r i t y over M.M. w i t h p r o g r e s s r e p o r t s t o t h e c o u r t e v e r y s i x months, r e t a i n e d c o n t i n u i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e c o u r t , provided t h a t any c u s t o d y o r d e r i n t h e d i v o r c e proceedings would n o t be i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h its o r d e r i n t h i s p r o c e e d i n g , provided a d e t a i l e d v i s i t a t i o n s c h e d u l e f o r t h e mother, and provided f o r m o d i f i c a t i o n by agreement of t h e p a r t i e s . The mother a p p e a l s . The mother a s s i g n s t h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e f o r review on appeal: Did t h e D i s t r i c t Court abuse its d i s c r e t i o n i n denying her c u s t o d y of M.M. i n v i o l a t i o n of s e c t i o n 41-3- 101, M C A ? She c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e f i n d i n g s of f a c t , conclu- s i o n s o f law and o r d e r of t h e D i s t r i c t Court a r e n o t sup- p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l evidence and t h a t t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f M.M. r e q u i r e c u s t o d y be awarded t o h e r . The g u a r d i a n ad l i t e m , t h e f a t h e r and SRS have f i l e d b r i e f s s u p p o r t i n g t h e f i n d i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s of law and o r d e r of t h e D i s t r i c t Court. The s t a t u t e r e l i e d upon by t h e mother p r o v i d e s i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t : " ( 2 ) I t is t h e p o l i c y of t h i s s t a t e t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n of c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h and w e l f a r e are o r may be a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d and f u r t h e r t h r e a t e n e d by t h e c o n d u c t o f t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . I t is i n t e n d e d t h a t t h e m a n d a t o r y r e p o r t i n g o f s u c h c a s e s by p r o f e s s i o n a l p e o p l e and o t h e r community members t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a u t h o r i t y w i l l c a u s e t h e p r o t e c t i v e ser- v i c e s of t h e s t a t e t o s e e k t o p r e v e n t f u r t h e r a b u s e s , p r o t e c t and enhance t h e w e l f a r e of t h e s e c h i l d r e n , and p r e s e r v e f a m i l y l i f e wherever a p p r o p r i a t e . " Sec- t i o n 41-3-101(2), MCA. The mother a r g u e s (1) t h a t t h e s t a t e f a i l e d t o make o u t a prima f a c i e c a s e , ( 2 ) t h a t t h e r e was s i m p l y n o t s u f f i - c i e n t c r e d i b l e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e c u s t o d y award t o t h e c h i l d ' s f a t h e r , and ( 3 ) t h a t t h e w e i g h t of t h e e v i d e n c e sup- p o r t s a c u s t o d y award t o h e r . W e hold t h e District Court d i d n o t abuse its d i s c r e - t i o n and its f i n d i n g s , c o n c l u s i o n s and o r d e r a r e s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e . The test f o r abuse of j u d i c i a l d i s c r e t i o n is whether t h e c o u r t a c t e d a r b i t r a r i l y w i t h o u t t h e employment o f c o n s c i e n t i o u s judgment o r exceeded t h e bounds of reason. Marriage of Berthiame ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 1 7 3 Mont. 421, 425, 567 P.2d 1388, 1390. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s o r d e r awarding c u s t o d y of c h i l d r e n is c l o t h e d w i t h t h e presumption of c o r r e c t n e s s . I n r e Gore ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 174 Mont. 321, 325, 570 P.2d 1110, 1112, c i t i n g Foss v. L e i f e r ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 170 Mont. 97, 550 P.2d 1309. I t is o n l y where t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s f i n d i n g s of f a c t a r e n o t s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e o r a m i s t a k e o f law e x i s t s t h a t w e w i l l f i n d an a b u s e of d i s c r e t i o n and d i s t u r b t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n . I n re Gore, s u p r a ; I n t h e M a t t e r of L.F.G. ( 1 9 7 9 ) , Mont . I - 598 P.2d 1125, 1128, 36 St.Rep. 1547, 1550; M a t t e r of C.M.S. ( 1 9 7 9 ) I Mont. - , 609 P.2d 240, 243, 36 St.Rep. 2004, 2008. The a p p e l l a n t , h e r e t h e mother, h a s t h e burden o f p r o v i n g an abuse of d i s c r e t i o n . I n R e Gore, 174 Mont. a t 326, 570 P.2d a t 1113. The u n c o n t r a d i c t e d e v i d e n c e shows t h a t t h e p a r e n t s r e - l i n q u i s h e d c u s t o d y of t h e c h i l d t o SRS a t t h e o u t s e t because t h e mother was v e n t i n g h e r f r u s t r a t i o n s on t h e c h i l d by screaming a t h e r , s h a k i n g h e r c r i b and w a l k e r , and s l a p p i n g h e r . She f e a r e d s h e would f u r t h e r a b u s e t h e c h i l d and needed h e l p t o r e l i e v e h e r stress and preven,t f u r t h e r m i s - t r e a t m e n t . Both s h e and t h e f a t h e r s t i p u l a t e d i n w r i t i n g t h a t M.M. was a youth i n need of care. On J u l y 2, 1980, f u r t h e r m i s t r e a t m e n t of t h e c h i l d by t h e mother o c c u r r e d . By t h a t time t h e c h i l d had developed a f l i n c h i n g r e f l e x t o t h e m o t h e r ' s d i s c i p l i n e . T h i s c o n s t i t u t e s s u b s t a n t i a l e v i - dence t h a t M.M. was a youth i n need of c a r e as t h e District C o u r t found . The c a s e s c i t e d by a p p e l l a n t f o r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s p o t e n t i a l f o r abuse of t h e c h i l d s h o u l d n o t be t h e b a s i s f o r d e p r i v i n g h e r of c u s t o d y a r e n o t i n p o i n t . E s t e l l v. E s t e l l ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 167 Mont. 247, 537 P.2d 1082, i n v o l v e d a s i t u a t i o n where c u s t o d y was o r i g i n a l l y awarded t o t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r b e c a u s e n e i t h e r p a r e n t c o u l d p r o v i d e a d e q u a t e c a r e f o r t h e c h i l d r e n . When c o n d i t i o n s changed, c u s t o d y was awarded t h e mother. Here c o n d i t i o n s d i d n o t change s u f f i c i e n t l y t o award c u s t o d y t o t h e mother. f i'ngeq S i n c l a i r v. S i n c l a i r (Okla. 1 9 6 4 ) , 392 P.2d 758, and Frrgem 2-A - v. ( 1 9 6 8 ) , 251 O r e . 458, 446 P.2d 185, s i m p l y h o l d t h a t r e c o v e r y from a mental i l l n e s s may e n t i t l e a p a r e n t t o r e g a i n c u s t o d y and a r e s o f a c t u a l l y d i s s i m i l a r from t h e p r e s e n t c a s e as t o be i n a p p o s i t e . S u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e s u p p o r t s t h e District C o u r t ' s f i n d i n g of a c o n t i n u i n g p o t e n t i a l f o r a b u s e by t h e mother. The e v i d e n c e shows c o n t i n u i n g stress i n h a n d l i n g p a r e n t a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , l a c k of a s u p p o r t system a f t e r h e r mother and s t e p f a t h e r moved o u t of t h e s t a t e , and a f a m i l y h i s t o r y of abuse. A f t e r SRS e f f o r t s t o h e l p h e r w i t h h e r problems f o r some t e n months, s h e still e x h i b i t e d a tendency t o abuse M.M. The u n c o n t r a d i c t e d e v i d e n c e shows no p o t e n t i a l f o r abuse i n t h e f a t h e r and no h i s t o r y of abuse i n h i s f a m i l y . I n sum, a l l t h a t a p p e l l a n t h a s done is a r g u e and q u o t e some t e s t i m o n y t h a t would s u p p o r t an award of M . M . ' s c u s t o d y t o h e r . T h i s is i n s u f f i c i e n t t o e s t a b l i s h an abuse of d i s - c r e t i o n by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i n i t s f i n d i n g s . W e f u r t h e r h o l d t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t made no e r r o r of l a w . The mother a r g u e s t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t s h o u l d have d i s m i s s e d t h i s p r o c e e d i n g and determined c u s t o d y i n t h e c o l l a t e r a l d i v o r c e p r o c e e d i n g s . Not s o . "Where a c h i l d h a s a l l e g e d l y been abused o r n e g l e c t e d by h i s n a t u r a l p a r e n t , t h e s t a t e h a s a c l e a r u u t y t o p r o t e c t t h e c h i l d by means of a j u d i c i a l h e a r i n g t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h e c h i l d is i n f a c t abused or n e g l e c t e d . " I n t h e Matter of Doney ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 174 Mont. 282, 285, 570 P.2d 575, 577. Once t h a t d e t e r m i n a t i o n h a s been made, as it h a s i n t h i s case, t h e c o u r t p r o c e e d s t o a d i s p o s i t i o n a l h e a r i n g t o d e t e r m i n e c u s t o d y of t h e c h i l d . S e c t i o n 41-3-406, MCA. The remaining c o n t e n t i o n s of t h e mother i n v o l v e t h e s u f f i c i e n c y of t h e e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e award of c u s t o d y t o t h e f a t h e r r a t h e r t h a n h e r . The s t a n d a r d t o be a p p l i e d i n d e t e r m i n i n g c u s t o d y is t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t of t h e c h i l d . I n re Gore, 174 Mont. a t 329, 570 P.2d a t 1114; M a t t e r of F i s h ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 174 Mont. 201, 206, 569 P.2d 924, 927. The D i s t r i c t Court i n its f i n d i n g s recognized a p o t e n t i a l f o r f u t u r e c h i l d abuse i n t h e mother, found no such p o t e n t i a l i n t h e f a t h e r , and determined t h a t it was i n t h e c h i l d ' s b e s t i n t e r e s t t o award c u s t o d y t o t h e f a t h e r . T h i s conforms t o t h e p o l i c y of t h e s t a t e " t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n of c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h and w e l f a r e a r e o r may be a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d and f u r t h e r t h r e a t e n e d by t h e conduct of t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e and p r o t e c t i o n . " S e c t i o n 41-3- 1 0 1 ( 2 ) , MCA. The testimony of C a r o l LaCasse, Dr. Biesemeyer, and Dr. W a l t e r s p r e v i o u s l y summarized i n t h i s o p i n i o n constitutes s u b s t a n t i a l evidence s u p p o r t i n g t h e f i n d i n g s , c o n c l u s i o n s and o r d e r awarding c u s t o d y t o t h e f a t h e r . Given t h e a l t e r n a t i v e of awarding t h e c u s t o d y t o t h e mother whose behavior had a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d t h e c h i l d and who posed a t h r e a t of continued abuse vis-a-vis a more s t a b l e nonabusive f a t h e r , t h e c o u r t awarded custody t o t h e l a t t e r . I n s o d o i n g , t h e D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t abuse its d i s c r e t i o n . W e have examined a l l t h e nuances and v a r i a t i o n s of t h e m o t h e r ' s c o n t e n t i o n s i n c l u d i n g t h e a u t h o r i t i e s c i t e d i n h e r b r i e f and f i n d them t o be w i t h o u t merit. Affirmed. W e concur: v n c s , / S X L ~ L , ~ ~ J u s t i c e s I'