Title: Matter of SYM

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

Matter of SYM1996 WY 132924 P.2d 985Case Number: C-95-12Decided: 10/08/1996Supreme Court of Wyoming
In 
the Matter of the Persons of SYM and JFM, minor children: DKM,

 Appellant 
(Respondent),

v.

RJS,

 Appellee (Petitioner).

Appeal from District 
Court, Big Horn County, Hunter Patrick, J.

Richard J. 
Albanese, Powell, for Appellant.

Debra 
Featherston Rush, Worland, for Appellee.

Larry B. 
Berryman, Worland, Guardian Ad Litem.

Before 
TAYLOR, C.J., and THOMAS, MACY, GOLDEN,* and LEHMAN, 
JJ.

* Chief Justice at time of 
conference.

TAYLOR, Chief 
Justice.

[¶1]      Due to 
incarceration and unfitness as a parent, appellant suffered termination of his 
parental rights to his minor children on the petition of appellee. Appellant 
claims his lack of fitness was not established and that less intrusive means of 
protecting the children were not undertaken. The constitutional magnitude of 
parental rights cannot, however, gainsay clear and convincing evidence that 
appellant is neither fit to the task of parenting nor up to the task of making 
himself so. We affirm.

I. 
ISSUES

[¶2]      In his statement 
of the issues, DKM (appellant) makes the following assertions:

1) Termination of 
parental rights under the provisions of W.S. § 14-2-309(a)(iv) requires a 
showing, by clear and convincing evidence, that no lesser intrusive means [can 
suffice] to accomplish the State's interest in protecting SYM and 
JFM.

2) "Incarceration", as 
used by W.S. § 14-2-309(a)(iv) requires a showing that the parent, through his 
criminal actions, has effectively removed himself from the parental role due to 
the period of incarceration.

3) W.S. § 14-2-309(a)(iv) 
requires a showing that the Respondent is unfit to have any contact with his 
children before his parental rights may be terminated.

[¶3]      Appellee, RJS 
(the mother), identifies only one issue:

1. Did the Petitioner 
present by clear and convincing evidence, facts sufficient to terminate 
Appellant's parental rights to SYM and JFM, pursuant to the provisions of W.S. § 
14-2-309(a)(iv)?

[¶4]      The children's 
Guardian ad Litem synthesizes the issues identified by the parties:

ISSUE ONE:

Fundamental 
Constitutional Rights are not compromised by termination of parental rights 
accomplished under W.S.A. Section 14-2-309(a)(iv), in those cases where by clear 
and convincing evidence it is established that (1) the parent is incarcerated 
due to the conviction of a felony and (2) that under the particular 
circumstances, such parent's unfitness to have the custody and control of the 
child is obvious.

ISSUE TWO:

"Incarceration", as 
utilized in W.S.A. Section 14-2-309(a)(iv) is an unambiguous term and entitled 
to its plain and ordinary meaning.

ISSUE THREE:

"Unfitness" as 
contemplated within W.S.A. Section 14-2-309(a)(iv) envisions a circumstance in 
which a parent has to a significant degree failed, because of moral delinquency, 
to appreciate and perform ordinary parental obligations and duties and the best 
interest of the child(ren) preclude said parent from gaining control or custody 
of them.

II. 
FACTS

[¶5]      The mother 
brought her daughter of a previous marriage, KB, to her union with appellant in 
1990. SYM and JFM were issue of the marriage with appellant.

[¶6]      On June 28, 1993, 
appellant was sentenced to a term at the Wyoming State Penitentiary for forcing 
KB to perform oral sex upon him. Appellant admitted to at least six separate 
such transgressions upon KB. A childhood victim of sexual and physical abuse 
himself, appellant's violations of KB characterize a long and uninterrupted 
history of assaultive and emotionally abusive behavior toward his children, 
their mother, a prior spouse and her children. A psychotherapist who evaluated 
appellant following his incarceration offered little hope for the 
future:

[Appellant] suffers from 
a personality disorder. That means change is slow to occur and there is a 
tendency to return to previously maladaptive ways of coping.

*           
*           
*           
*           
*           
*

* * * Being personality 
disordered, chemically dependent and having many traits of a sex addict, 
diminish [appellant's] prognosis considerably from that of other incest 
perpetrators.

(Emphasis in 
original.) Appellant's concept of responsibility is so skewed that he blames his 
minor victim for his crime, stating: "She should have talked to her mother 
earlier."

III. STANDARD OF 
REVIEW

[¶7]      The case for 
termination of parental rights must be made by clear and convincing evidence 
pursuant to Wyo. Stat. § 14-2-309(a) (1994). Because association with one's 
immediate family is a fundamental liberty interest, application of the "clear 
and convincing" standard to evidence supporting termination becomes the subject 
of strict scrutiny at the appellate level. TR v. Washakie County Dept. of Public 
Assistance and Social Services, 736 P.2d 712, 715 (Wyo. 1987). Exacting though 
such scrutiny may be, we undertake examination of the evidence in a light most 
favorable to the party prevailing below, assuming all favorable evidence to be 
true while discounting conflicting evidence presented by the unsuccessful party. 
In Interest of JG, 742 P.2d 770, 773 (Wyo. 1987).

[¶8]      The fundamental 
nature of the parent-child relationship also leads to strict construction of 
applicable statutes against those seeking termination and in favor of the 
non-consenting parent. DS v. Department of Public Assistance and Social 
Services, 607 P.2d 911, 918 (Wyo. 1980) (quoting Matter of Voss' Adoption, 550 P.2d 481, 485 (Wyo. 1976)). When, however, the language of a statute conveys a 
clear and definite meaning, we neither face the need nor acquire the license to 
construe that statute. Goff v. Goff, 844 P.2d 1087, 1089 (Wyo. 1993); Matter of 
Adoption of RDS, 787 P.2d 968, 969 n. 5 (Wyo. 1990).

IV. 
DISCUSSION

[¶9]      Wyo. Stat. § 
14-2-309(a)(i) through (iv) affords four independent bases for the termination 
of parental rights. Termination actions taken pursuant to Wyo. Stat. § 
14-2-309(a)(iii) focus upon the unfitness of the parent, requiring the 
petitioner to establish three elements:

"(1) [A]busive treatment 
or neglect by the parent; (2) unsuccessful efforts to rehabilitate the family 
(i.e. termination of parental rights is the least intrusive means to satisfy the 
State's interest); and (3) the child's health and safety would be seriously 
jeopardized by remaining with or returning to the parent." Matter of GP, Wyo., 
679 P.2d 976, 1005 (1984).

In Interest of 
JG, 742 P.2d  at 773.

[¶10]   When termination of parental rights 
is sought pursuant to Wyo. Stat. § 14-2-309(a)(iv), the petitioner must 
establish two elements:

(1) that the parent is 
incarcerated due to conviction of a felony; and (2) that the parent is unfit to 
have custody and control of the child.

RW v. State ex 
rel. Laramie County Dept. of Public Assistance and Social Services, 766 P.2d 555, 557 (Wyo. 1989).

[¶11]   We have yet to fully resolve the 
question of whether proof of parental unfitness, for purposes of Wyo. Stat. § 
14-2-309(a)(iv), necessarily requires a showing of unsuccessful rehabilitation 
efforts - the "lesser intrusive means" elemental to a showing of unfitness under 
Wyo. Stat. § 14-2-309(a)(iii). See RW, 766 P.2d  at 557-59 (Justices Thomas, 
Golden and Urbigkit specially concurring).

[¶12]   In RW, the articulable 
impracticality of rehabilitation foreclosed any need to forge a consensus with 
respect to the "lesser intrusive means" test. Here, treatment was resisted by an 
appellant whose chances at rehabilitation were shown to be negligible, even 
under the most optimal of circumstances. 

[¶13]   His own expert witness questioned 
appellant's commitment to therapy, testifying that treatment had effected no 
meaningful change in appellant's attitudes or predispositions, leaving him a 
continual threat to the welfare of children in his care and custody. Finding 
that appellant's unfitness as a parent was likely to endure, the district court 
was able to determine that appellant is "unfit under any standard to have the 
care and custody of his two (2) minor children." Even under the cautious view 
urged by the special concurrences in RW, 766 P.2d  at 557-59, the evidence 
demonstrates that "lesser intrusive means" of protecting the State's interest 
(i.e., the children's well-being) have failed and that appellant's grim 
prognosis for recovery renders further efforts impractical.

[¶14]   Appellant's unfitness to the role 
of parent, by any standard, makes it unnecessary to resolve the "lesser 
intrusive means" issue with respect to Wyo. Stat. § 14-2-309(a)(iv). No such 
question lingers, however, as to the element of incarceration necessary to 
termination under Wyo. Stat. § 14-2-309(a)(iv). There can be no doubt as to the 
plain and ordinary meaning of the initial element required by Wyo. Stat. § 
14-2-309(a)(iv): "[t]he parent is incarcerated due to the conviction of a felony 
* * *." Absent the slightest hint of ambiguity, we decline appellant's 
invitation to judicially superimpose a durational threshold on the element of 
incarceration due to conviction of a felony.

V. 
CONCLUSION

[¶15]   The mother has proven, by clear and 
convincing evidence, appellant's incarceration due to conviction of a felony and 
his manifest unfitness to have custody and control of any child. The 
decision of the district court to terminate appellant's parental rights to SYM 
and JFM is affirmed.