thank you your honor and first the state apologizes but we did not receive a long break we actually thought that she had decided not to appeal because we never received anything in the i'm here to represent the mother helen in this case this case is a little different than most cases has started out w the children oh mother and father being found out roaming the streets at twelve thirty in the am mother was inside the house now i think it's easy for us all do agree that unless there are some circumstance outside normal control a parent should not be sleeping twelve thirty in the afternoon while the the caseworker casey below who finished the case out she was also not really aware of the driver's license issue because she knew the mom wasn't complying with parts of the service plan but never asked why why didn't you go to camps those questions were mother also had an issue with medical that prevented her from seeking the specialist help she needed to deal with her absent epilepsy issues in her seizure disorder she is because the state of illinois is not paying quick enough professional specialist positions i don't believe that the service plan that was created was formulated as you deal with the issues the mother had which led to the removal of the kid from its undisputed that mother was not making very good progress in their service but the questions were never asked why is she not making this promise that the caseworkers in the camps where's been more attentive to the problems the specific problems the mother had with her apple absolutely or see the disorder they may have been able to formulate a service plan better equipped to deal with those issues and given mother a fighting chance at making progress on the serv from the get go if those issues the seizures and epilepsy aren't addressed these other issues in the service plan mom's never going to be able to comply therefore tearing this family or this case isn't very important to the families and parties involved in them but it's also important to these types of cases in general  ass in the case workers need to make plans for specific to the problems that are leading to the removal of these children without giving these parents a fighting chance terminations are going to be happening all over  t now there are some situations where the standard service plan counseling treatment all those things are going to be beneficial and solve the problems of the case but every one of these need to be mom didn't even have much you comply with the service plan and try to get it she made some efforts here and there as well as documented in the progress report but none of these chance the system is just geared towards terminating these parental rights and splitting up and in regards to the issue of best interest best interest oh a much lower burden as the courts are aware than these foster families are are pretty much always very good so the best interest issue there's not a lot to fight about but i submit that had the service plans been crafted appropriately in the beginning we might not have even got the best interest because w well i think the opposite result was clearly apparent i think at the trial court when presented with evidence whether or not court to truly see whether or not there were reasonable africa reasonable progress may have had there been evidence presented it may have been a different result that at the counsel at the time as mr goes you pointed out that the client side of the children were removed from the home that my client and his client shared my client previously left for the day he was gone in the morning i doing some business running some errands over and sale of the couple of the family residing at that time and sandal when he left there was a cousin or an acquaintance of the family that was home with the children he came home around eight o'clock eight thirty in the morning the mother of the children was there my clients and this cousin or going then left to go to sell them to do some other errands business i think it points may have had a court appearance when they left the children were home in the care of their m mean to make an argument that i've recently made the original reason that the children in the family were brought into care was they were found outside unsupervised that's an acceptable there's no argument but if we also consider that it's my client's involvement was when he left mamma's taken care of the kids even if he's aware of medical issues and other things involved in her life that may at times affect her ability to grope really care for the children when he left that morning i don't think that there's anything in the record that would give us reason to think why was a terrible idea he should not once the family comes into the system comes into the juvenile court system we often learn about there i don't see other things that have to be addressed other problems going on with the families and other areas for improvement that parents need to oftentimes work on that's when we get the family service plan as the court knows those family service plans are relatively detailed they can serve as a checklist of things to be worked on things to be improved by the parents if we look at the requirements of the family service plan as it relates to my clients the first back nine month period alleged in the petition to terminate rights like point two twenty fifteen through april fifteenth twenty sixty there were approximately twenty one point two items that my client was called to address by the end of that time period by april fifteenth two thousand sixteen he had completed twelve of those items twelve certainly not twenty one or twenty two but twelve the certainly more than three for  shortly after the family first came into the juvenile court system in july of two thousand and fifteen already my client started therapy a community resource center he completed the requirements for a substance abuse treatment and it opened up was asked if he had been opened up for mental health counseling he was already living in a home that no one had said other than the children being able to get out that the home was unsafe and to that point  upon one of the first meetings with a counselor or with a d c fs worker the parties acknowledged the safety threat to the minor children and they purchased some child safety resources i don't think the record ever says or ever shows exactly what those items work but the important thing is that within a very short time period of these children getting outside both parents recognized  ok we need to get something for our house to try to prevent that from happening again that's certainly a positive step in the right direction and making sure that problem doesn't happen again this is  because the home appears otherwise be suitable for a family and for children once they make it make some adjustments or some improvements or purchase these child safety resources i made the home that much more secure a much better for the families for the child throughout the case my client was self employed at times doing maybe our job or or larger jobs for some people on the day the children were found out he testified he was working on an asphalt job and sam there were other times throughout the case where he for short periods he had one elsewhere and he was a factory worker at one time but he was working he was trying to provide for his family as a self employed person i'm sure he was out frequently gone longer than immediately after coming into the juvenile court system and i think he they were also on a wait list for in home parenting classes at the very beginning first nine month period he's already doing things when we get to january of two thousand and sixteen the parties have moved into an apartment out of the house they were living him again there's no indication of this apartment was unsuitable for children they were taken off a waiting list for the in home parenting classes and he was getting three hours a week of visitation with the children supervised either by the c f s or parent toss based worker well for one hour a week and she hours week was to be supervised by the foster care and again by april fifteenth twenty sixteen the end of the initial nine month period we did twelve of the items on his family service plan and subsequent family service plans added some additional requirements and chuck by my count approximately four of the original requirements away so when we're looking at what do you do now later service plans the numbers don't exactly match up get twenty two and had an eleven i think ended up with twenty nine or thirty and didn't end up with thirty four thirty five and there's overlap also in these nine month periods that are alleged the first one is july period which is the last four month period last four months of the second one not period in the petition my client also completed the in home parent class and he wasn't completing those at home all the time with the caseworker and with his with the mother because of his attempts to work in his being self employed he was actually doing the casework relieving some homework there for the counselors leaving home for him to do so i submit that he actually put in more effort and it was harder for him because not only is he gone during the day when these classes are his counseling sessions are taking place at home he's out working and then when he gets home he still has to do  the requirements of those counseling classes i also know that the trial court judge sanders in one of her rulings i think it was the fitness ruling state tried very hard to complete the items in his family service plan well that leads me to the question of if trying very hard was not a reasonable effort what is a reasonable level what can there be beyond trying very hard but you have to do to say that you're putting forth a reasonable e much of the same arguments the same statements going to apply to progress i think the biggest progress that was made was very early on they bought off these child safety resources to try to prevent the children getting outside again they knew it was  was a problem they knew that that was not something that can happen if they want to remain a family they took the steps right away to make things to prevent that from happening again again as i stated also in august  thousand and sixteen they completed in home parenting classes so they're completing something i submit is certainly reasonable progress and for these reasons we would ask that  years following the removal of their children from the home in the best interest of the children the respondents his parental rights were terminated and the boys were freed up for a guard training where the boy's foster homes are eager to make them permanent parts of but this was not and first time offense this was actually the fourth time that the c f s had gotten involved and it was the second time within a month that they had to be hauled the first time being that the youngest boy was out at the beginning of april lane in the street again in nothing but a diaper absolutely no argument from any said that that's not acceptable but then less than a month later you have all three of those boys playing in that same busy street unsupervised and there can be very little argument that there wasn't some kind of notice that something needed to be done maybe mom means little bit more help at home because she can't take care of the kids by herself dad can't just leave because he has noticed that there's the potential for those children to be endangered again prior to those two instances there was also an issue with housing where they were reported because the older more filthy that was feces all over the home mom and dad to get that together however  there were prior instances where the house is just not my place for those points to be looking at the response particular point of view  completed many of the goals set on each of the service plans but he ignores the fact that there were secondary parts to those goals which were things such as follow up or maintain or continue to meet the goals that are set out and that was one of the biggest issues the trial court had when they determined that he was an unfit parent because might have done the work sheets to where it had to be a parent but then he never displayed any of what he was supposed to be learning with the boys he was told he was being too rough with them and sometimes he would just get on his phone during visits and not interact with boys at all other times he just would completely not show up for visit yes your honor during supervised visits he would be too rough he would be on his phone or he just wouldn't show up and he wouldn't contact d c s to tell them that he wouldn't be able to make it your own or there was can take his word for that one he never gave proof of his self employment he did the time several times to gain employment however he said he started working on feb ninth of this here and the  caseworker didn't find out until she called the company that he actually quit that job on feb fourteenth and during that time the caseworker was actually pulling the boys out of school so that jack could have his visits with the kids which obviously you don't want to pull kids out of school they're supposed to be larry mean well doug never said anything about quitting his job and during that time he was still missing some of those so obviously failing to display some of the principal responsibility that you hope is being instilled from his parenting classes in addition your honors at one point dad did find sufficient housing he was approved to start having visits with the kids in the home however dad continue to have the visit out in the community if he showed up for them and then he moved so as it stands at the terminations hearing that actually testified to the fact that he was in a home that needed renovations including plumbing and admitted that it would be a while before the home was in a state that would be appropriate for the  i supposed trying to turn to mom and dad combined mom and dad have some relationship issues that have become noticeable toward the later part of the record there was an incident where the police were involved one evening where mom and dad were calling the police on each other making different allegations they have an on again off again relationship that doesn't really instill very much stability into a child's life and they or demonstrate what you're learning in order to get your children back mom's service when she was supposed to have a substance abuse were supervised and she was also supposed to voluntarily do drugs crean's as she was ordered to do them first of all she did not comply with the drug screenings the few times that she did they came back positive those would be  and december boys she actually got aggressive with the caseworker to the point that the caseworker felt threatened and so they had to make some adjustments or she could continue her supervised visits with the boys and they obviously had to be out in the community at that time at the current moment mom and dad are roommates i'm not really sure if that means they're together or not they turn them to as roommates and so mom also has not obtained adequate housing for the children to live in because again has severe innovated they have to even get i mean in this home the house is not then looked at by a caseworker because they were supposed to call when they felt that it w adequate for it to be looked at to see if the boys could come by for a visit they never called them in terms of looking at the goals that were set service plan your honour's there's not a magic number that can be checked off to make something reasonable the reason that these cases are so x specific is because some of these goals aren't particularly big it's giving permission to have someone come in look at your home and it's agreeing to go get an assessment done some of these goals are not particularly big so there's not a magic check that old dad finished fifteen these goals it there's not a checkbox for this to make something reasonable has to be looked at on an individual basis and in this case the trial court looked at that and felt that dad still wasn't making any reasonable progress or efforts in order to get the boy back he did make some efforts there's no doubt about that and there's no doubt that he loves his kids but he couldn't get it together in time to get his children back and it came to a point where the trial court had to say it's time to consider stability and reliability for these boys spend two years and so they determine that the parents were unfit after such a long period of time where they just were not making enough progress particularly when they have and the state would just hold at the trial court properly found that the parents were unfit and then they terminated their rights of the parents so that the boys can be placed with their foster parents i mean we want to adopt them  and to get it were just reiterate that not only is this case important but it's also important to protecting families keeping families giving them the ability to but are they trying are they getting down to what they're supposed to do and are they doing some of that's really all i think we can can gauge by looking at from a pure numbers standpoint regards to the state's argument that my client was not showing what he was learning in the various parenting classes and things like that when he was interacting with the children there the january twenty second two thousand and sixteen report it notes there were some confusion amongst the supervisors for the visitation either the caseworkers or the foster parents they weren't really sure that what they were supposed to be doing as far as documenting what they were observing in these classes as to the foster parent specific lea i believe the record states that the foster parents were supervising two hours of visitation a week if they're supposed to be observing and noting what they see as far as the interaction between my client and the children and whether or not my client is applying what he's wearing in these classes we've got to know what he's learning a class there's nothing indicate they've got any  any qualifications to say yes he is learning or he's applying he's learned in these parenting first class that we have no reason to to really put any stock into their reports should they even have provided one which i think the record says they were really supposed to but doesn't look like he did so i don't think there's any basis to say that he's not i don't think it accurate basis to state that my claim didn't