Title: In re J.B., Juvenile

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

In re J.B., Juvenile (2001-191); 173 Vt. 515; 787 A.2d 1290

[Filed 26-Sep-2001]

[Motion for Reargument Denied 26-Nov-2001]

 
                                 ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2001-191

                              AUGUST TERM, 2001

In re J.B., Juvenile	               }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     	                               }	Chittenden Family Court
                                       }	
                                       }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 495-10-99 Cnjv

                                                Trial Judge: James R. Crucitti

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Mother and father appeal from an order terminating their parental
  rights to their son, J.B.   Father contends that the court erred in
  admitting testimony from an SRS worker regarding father's  inability to
  grasp parenting concepts seven years earlier which led to the termination
  of his parental  rights to another child.  Mother contends that the court's
  prejudgment of the case invalidates the  termination proceeding.  We
  affirm.

       The court made the following findings which neither parent has
  challenged on appeal.  J.B.,  born September 26, 1999, is the son of mother
  A.B. and father R.B.  J.B. was born with serious  physical disabilities
  which required that he be fed through a feeding tube and remain
  hospitalized for  the first six weeks of his life.  Hospital officials
  alerted SRS that they were concerned the parents  would be unable to care
  for the child due to his special needs and the level of conflict between
  the  parents.  On October 29, 1999, SRS filed a petition alleging J.B. to
  be a child in need of care and  supervision (CHINS).  At the CHINS merits
  hearing, mother admitted that due to her cerebral palsy  and motor
  impairment she was unable to physically care for the child without
  assistance.  Because of  father's inadequate parenting skills, he was
  unable to help her care for the child.  Father has a  guardian assigned to
  him by the probate court to assist him with his living arrangements.  He
  has  been classified as having a lower level I.Q. and lacks the basic
  knowledge regarding child  development to care for the child.  On May 12,
  2000, the court found J.B. to be a CHINS based on  mother's admission, the
  domestic violence existing in the family, and father's lack of basic 
  knowledge of child care necessary for the safety of J.B.

       On July 5, 2000, SRS filed its original disposition report, which
  called for termination of  parental rights, with a concurrent plan of
  services and possible reunification between mother and J.B.  Visits were
  initially twice a week, for two hours per visit.  Mother requested that the
  visits be  reduced to once a week.  During the visits, mother was often
  tired, and often arrived late or left early.  Mother's ability to
  understand and meet the child's needs did not keep pace with the child's 

 

  development.  Father often used the visits to discuss his own personal
  problems with J.B.'s foster  father.  The couple's pattern of domestic
  violence continued.  On August 2000, SRS filed a  disposition report
  requesting termination of parental rights.

       At the time of the TPR hearing, father was incarcerated for failing to
  comply with probation  conditions on a previous offense, and had a domestic
  assault charge for his actions against mother  and an attempted sexual
  assault charge pending.  Father was not expected to be released from 
  custody within two years.  Mother distanced herself physically and
  emotionally from the child.   A  psychological evaluation of mother found
  her to be suffering from depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress
  symptoms.  The evaluator recommended that mother's parental rights be
  terminated.  The court concluded that mother's inability to parent the
  child went beyond her mere physical  limitations.  Mother refused to engage
  in services offered by SRS that might have assisted her in  caring for J.B. 
  Mother refused to obtain help for domestic assault, failed to grasp basic
  parenting  skills, relocated to another state, and had serious emotional
  issues which required intensive therapy  before she could  safely parent
  J.B.  The court concluded that mother did not have the present ability  to
  parent J.B., nor would she have that ability within a reasonable period of
  time.  The court  concluded that father's incarceration, his lack of basic
  parenting skills and maturity, and his limited  cognitive ability and
  history of violence against women made him unable to resume his parental 
  duties in a reasonable period of time.  Both mother and father appealed. 

       Father contends that the court erred in admitting the testimony of the
  SRS social worker who  worked with father seven years earlier regarding his
  first child C.S.  The social worker testified that  R.B. did not benefit
  from prior departmental interventions and was unable to learn basic
  parenting  skills and concepts.  Eventually, father voluntarily terminated
  his parental rights to C.S.  Although  requesting an offer of proof, father
  did not object to this testimony during the hearing, and therefore  has
  waived the issue on appeal.  See O'Brien v. Island Corp., 157 Vt. 135, 141,
  596 A.2d 1295, 1298  (1991).  Notwithstanding this waiver, we see no error
  in the court admitting testimony regarding  father's inability to acquire
  the skills necessary to parent his older child in assessing whether father 
  will be able to acquire these same skills within a reasonable period of
  time in order to resume  parenting J.B.  See generally In re J.B., 167 Vt.
  637, 640,