### J - A02036
- 16

NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 IN RE: S.A.K., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA APPEAL OF: A.M.K. No. 979 MDA 2015 Appeal from the Decree May 8, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of York County Juvenile Division

at No(s): CP
- 67
- DP - 0000170
- 2013 IN RE: AD OPTION OF: S.A.K. IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA APPEAL OF: A.M.K. No. 9 99 MDA 2015

Appeal from the Order Entered May 8, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans’ Court at No(s): 2014
- 0180 BEFORE: P ANELLA, STABIL E, and FITZGERALD, * 

### JJ. MEMORANDUM BY FITZGERALD, J.: FILED MAY 17, 2016 A.M.K. (“Mother”) appeals from the decree and order, dated and entered May 8, 2015, that granted the petition filed by the York County Office of Children, Youth and Families Service (“CYF”) seeking t o terminate her parental rights to her male child, S.A.K. (“Child”), born in November of 2011, pursuant to the Adoption Act, 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(1), (2), (5), (8), and (b). 1 

### We vacate and remand.

* 

### Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court. 1 

### In the same decree entered on May 8, 2015, the trial court also terminated the paren tal rights of Child’s father, D.G. (“Father”). Father has not filed an appeal and is not a party in the present appeal.

### J - A02036
- 16

- 2
-

We adopt the trial court’s factual background and procedur al history. See Trial Ct. Op., 5/8/15, at 1
- 15. Importantly, on December 16, 2014, CYF filed petitions for the involuntary termination of the parental rights of Mother and Father, and for a change of permanency goal to adoption under Section 6351 of the Juvenile Act. In an order dated January 9, 2015, and entered on January 12, 2015, the trial court scheduled a hearing on the petitions to occur on February 20, 2015. On January 14, 2015, CYF filed the affidavit of attempted service of the Act 101 Notice on Mother via United States Postal Service, which was returned as undeliverable. On February 18, 2015, CYF filed the proof of notice required by the Act 101 Notice on Mother, indicating that she refused to sign for receipt of the notice. On February 20, 2 015, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the petitions with regard to Father, as Mother had not received the ten days’ notice. N.T., 2/20/15, at 10, 15. Mother had only received notice of the petition and hearing on February 18, 2015. Id. at 15. Mother appeared at the February 20th hearing without any counsel to represent her, and she did not waive any defect regarding CYF’s service. Id. The trial court scheduled the evidentiary hearing to continue on March 12, 2015, with regard to Mother, but proceeded with the hearing as to Father. Id. On March 12, 2015, and March 20, 2015, the trial court held the evidentiary hearings on the petitions with regard to Mother. Mother did not have counsel to represent her, and proceeded pro se . Mot her arrived late at

### J - A02036
- 16

- 3
-

the March 12th hearing, which had commenced in her absence. When she arrived, the following exchange took place between Mother and the trial court. THE COURT: [Mother]?

[MOTHER]: Yep, I apologize. Your Honor, I would just ask that yo u show a little bit of leniency. I am learning the process, and I do appreciate that very much. THE COURT: [Mother], I will provide you with some accommodation given your [sic] self
- represented counsel. However, you will be held to the same standards as counsel, as you have chosen to represent yourself in this matter. I may intervene, but I cannot help you present your case. I am not here to represent you, but I do have an obligation to make sure that this matter proceeds in an appropriate manner as ar e [sic] required by the Rules of Evidence. I need you to compose yourself so you can ask your questions. [MOTHER]: I’m ready now. [THE COURT]: Are you ready? [MOTHER]: Yes. N.T., 3/12/15, at 12
- 13. On May 8, 2015, the trial court entered its final dec ree and adjudication, involuntarily terminating the parental rights of Mother and Father. On June 8, 2015, Mother, acting pro se , filed notices of appeal, along with concise statements of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)(2)(i) and (b). On September 15, 2015, this Court sua sponte consolidated the appeals. Moreover, on September 15, 2015, this Court remanded the matter to the trial court to appoint counsel to represent

### J - A02036
- 16

- 4 -

Mother on appeal, citing 23 Pa.C.S. § 2313(a.1) and 42 Pa.C .S. § 6337, retained jurisdiction, and extended Mother’s time for filing her brief. Mother’s appointed counsel then filed a brief on her behalf on November 2, 2015. In her brief, Mother raises three issues on appeal: 1. Whether the lower court abused i ts discretion in keeping the goal in the juvenile dependency action as reunification with a parent[?] 2. Whether the lower court abused its discretion in the adoption action in involuntarily terminating the parental rights of the mother[?] 3. Whether the lower court abused its discretion in allowing the mother to represent herself in light of her mental health issues affecting her ability to competently represent herself[?] Mother’s Brief at 6. We first address Mother’s third issue, in which Mother argue s that it was contradictory for the trial court to allow her to represent herself when one of her goals was to address her mental health issues. Id. at 31. Mother filed her Rule 1925(b) concise statement acting pro se , and did not raise the issue of the trial court’s failure to appoint counsel to represent her. If the trial court erred by (1) allowing Mother to proceed pro se , and (2) failing to appoint counsel to represent Mother in the termination hearings as well as to file her notice of appeal and co ncise statement, she should not be penalized with waiver. Cf. In re X.J. , 105 A.3d 1, 4 (Pa. Super. 2014) (stating that “when a party ‘was denied [her] right to counsel
— or failed to properly waive

### J - A02036
- 16

- 5 -

that right
— ’” in a termination of parental rights case, “t his Court is required to raise this error sua sponte and remand for the” trial court to correct that mistake); see generally Krebs v. United Refining Co. of Pa. , 893 A.2d 776, 797 (Pa. Super. 2006) (holding that an appellant waives issues that are not rais ed in both his or her concise statement of errors complained of on appeal and the Statement of Questions Involved in his or her brief on appeal). We thus decline to find waiver. Appellees CYF and the guardian ad litem assert that the trial court appointed counsel to represent Mother in the dependency proceedings on August 19, 2013, and that the trial court discharged her appointed counsel on June 23, 2014, at Mother’s request. Appellees’ Brief at 22. They argue as follows:

In spite of the fact that Mothe r had knowledge of the procedure and process in order to obtain court appointed counsel, she failed to avail herself of this additional request after the discharge of her court appointed counsel. To allege that it was an error of the [c]ourt to not reappo int an attorney to represent Mother is misplaced and not supported in law. A parent has the opportunity to retain an attorney to represent them in the dependency, as well as termination of parental rights proceedings; however, if a parent does not have th e financial resources to retain an attorney privately, a procedure and mechanism exists to make application for a court appointed counsel. The record is silent as to any action taken by the [m]other in this regard after the discharge of her attorney in Ju ne 2014. Id. at 22
- 23.

### J - A02036
- 16

- 6
-

We respectfully disagree with Appellees. In In re X.J. , a panel of this Court addressed a procedural posture that was very similar to the instant appeal. In In re X.J. , the juvenile court appointed counsel to represent the mot her in dependency proceedings. In re X.J. , 105 A.3d at 5. The court then permitted the mother’s dependency
- proceeding counsel to withdraw; meanwhile, the Lancaster County Children and Youth Social Service Agency’s filed a termination
- of
- parental
- rights p etition in the orphans’ court. Id. at 4 - 5. The record revealed that the court never appointed counsel to represent the mother in the termination proceedings. Id. at 5 - 6. The In re X.J. Court explained the issue posed by the absence of appointed counsel for a termination proceedings:

Our review of the record reveals an issue pertaining to [the mother’s] lack of representation during the termination proceedings below. The Adoption Act controls termination of parental rights proceedings. See generally 23 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 2511
– 2513. It provides that a court “shall appoint counsel for a parent whose rights are subject to termination in an involuntary termination proceeding if, upon petition of the parent, the court determines that the parent is unable to pay f or counsel or if payment would result in substantial financial hardship.” Id. § 2313(a.1); see also In re J.T. , 983 A.2d 771, 774 (Pa. Super. 2009) (stating, “an indigent parent in a termination of parental rights case has a constitutional right to counse l . . . [and t]he right to counsel in parental termination cases is the right to effective assistance of counsel even though the case is civil in nature[ ]”) (citations omitted). An indigent parent in termination proceedings is likewise entitled to be adv ised of that right. In re Adoption of R.I. , 455 Pa. 29, 312 A.2d 601, 603 (1973). This Court has held that when a party “was denied [her] right to counsel
— or failed to properly waive that right
— this Court is required to raise this error sua sponte and re mand for the PCRA court to

### J - A02036
- 16

- 7 - correct that mistake.” Commonwealth v. Stossel , 17 A.3d 1286, 1290 (Pa. Super. 2011). In light of the statutory and constitutional right at stake, we conclude the principle enunciated in Stossel is appropriate in termination of parental rights cases. In In re J.N.F. , 887 A.2d 775 (Pa. Super. 2005), this Court held, consistent with the text of Section 2313(a.1), that the parent must request a court
- appointed attorney once notified of the requirement to do so. Id. at 780. In th at case, this Court concluded that the father, who was incarcerated, was provided with adequate notice that he was required to affirmatively request an attorney. The appointment of counsel for indigent parents in termination proceedings is controlled by 2 3 Pa.C.S.A. § 2313(a.1), which states, in pertinent part, the following: (a.1) PARENT.
— The court shall appoint counsel for a parent whose rights are subject to termination in an involuntary termination proceeding if, upon petition of the parent , the court determines that the parent is unable to pay for counsel or if payment would result in substantial financial hardship. (emphasis added). In [that] case, the original termination petition contained a notice that stated the following: You have a right t o be represented at the hearing by a lawyer; however, it is not necessary to have a lawyer at this hearing. A court - appointed attorney will be assigned to represent you if you cannot afford legal help. The Family/Orphans’ Court Administrator will be pres ent at this hearing. She will give you an application for request of a court
- appointed attorney. This attorney will represent you at your [termination hearing]. If you have any questions, contact [the Family/Orphans’ Court Administrator].

### J - A02036
- 16

- 8
- See Notice, 9 /4/2004. Id. This Court concluded that the orphans’ court was not required to appoint counsel because the father did not request court - appointed counsel after he received notice of his right to do so. Id. However, in this case, [the mother] was not ad vised of her right to counsel in the termination proceeding. Neither the termination petition, nor the orphans’ court’s preliminary decree contained any type of notice provision described in In re J.N.F. Furthermore, the certified record does not contain any indication that [the mother] was served with any of the filings in the termination proceedings below, except for the final termination decree that is the subject of this appeal. Since [the mother] was never notified of the proceedings against her, he r right to counsel, or of her obligation to request the same, we deem the certified record’s silence on [the mother’s] application for counsel immaterial for the purposes of this appeal. Based on these considerations, we conclude that In re J.N.F. does no t present an impediment to our decision in this case. * * * Furthermore, our review of the record reveals there were no orders appointing counsel for [the mother] for the purposes of the termination proceedings, nor evidence of any notice to [the mother] of her right to counsel. Thus, the certified record reveals that [the mother] did not receive counsel for the purposes of termination proceedings, even though she was entitled to representation. See, e.g., Stossel , supra ; In re J.T. , supra . N or does the record indicate that [the mother] was ever advised of her right to counsel for termination proceedings. See In re Adoption of R.I. , supra . Therefore, we believe the best course of action is to remand this case for a new termination hearing, b efore which the orphans’ court shall advise [the mother] of her counsel rights, appoint counsel for [the mother], or

### J - A02036
- 16

- 9
- affirmatively determine that [the mother] does not qualify for counsel. Based on the foregoing, we conclude that [the mother’s] right to counsel was violated in the termination proceedings below. Accordingly, counsel’s petition to withdraw is denied, the orphans’ court’s April 21, 2014 decree is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings, consistent with this opinion. In r e X.J. , 105 A.3d at 4
- 7. In the instant appeal, identical to In re X.J. , our review of the record reveals there were no orders appointing counsel for Mother for the purposes of the termination proceedings, and there is no any evidence of any notice to Moth er of her right to counsel. See id. Neither the termination petition, nor the notice of hearing, nor any other record document set forth the provision regarding Mother’s right to counsel as provided in Section 2313(a.1) of the Adoption Act. See id. Thu s, the certified record reveals that Mother did not have appointed counsel for the purposes of termination proceedings, even though she was entitled to representation. See id. (citing Stossel , 17 A.3d at 1290; In re J.N.F. , 887 A.2d at 780). The record a lso does not indicate that Mother was ever advised of her right to counsel for termination proceedings. See id. (citing, In re Adoption of R.I. , 312 A.2d at 603). Accordingly, we conclude that Mother was deprived of her right to counsel in the terminatio n proceedings. See id. at 7. Thus, we remand this case for a new termination hearing, before which the orphans’ court shall advise

### J - A02036
- 16

- 10
-

Mother of her counsel rights, appoint counsel for Mother, or affirmatively determine that Mother does not qualify for couns el. 2 

### See id. Decree vacated. Case remanded with instructions as set forth above. Jurisdiction relinquished. Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 5/17/2016

2 

### In light of our resolution of this matter, we do not address Mother’s remaining issues.--i

---- - -~~-ft--------

- · - - ~-~ · -- ·--·

on March 20, 2015. Mother was not prepared to offer any credible evidence , and foiled to admission into the record and to provide the parties with an opportunity to present summation scheduled an additional continued hearing to permit Mother to exchange exhibits for opportunity to present additional exhibits for entry into the record. The Court therefore the hearing on March 12, 2015 adjourned, Mother repres e nted that she was denied the time provided her with personal notice of the continued hearing date of March 12, 2015. After did appear at the February 18, 2015 hearing and requested a continuance. The Court at that the hearing, having only been served with the scheduling Order on February 18, 2015. Mother regarding the petition on February 20, 2015. Mother was provided with insufficient notice of filed on December 16, 2015. An evidentiary hearing was originally scheduled to occur Rights of A 

# J 

# J. K .. 

## ,11 (hereinafter "Mother") to the above-captioned minor child 

### ADJUDICATION I co 

## At••KJ?III. Self-Represented 0 N Martin Miller , Esquire Office of Children, Youth & Families David Worley, Esquire Guardian Ad Litem 

# c 0 

## -<o o- :::.:,> 

## ,,_. ·o '"01"'1 

### >'::!: 

# ~. ~.'
:, J (Jl r- o Presently before the Court is the Petition for Involuntary Termination of Parental 

### APPEARANCES: No. 2014-0180 Termination of Parental Rights In Re: Adoption of 

### S~-K .... 

### lt:

A Minor 

### ~~ - -- - - - - - -- --- ----------------- -- ~ - -~ - --- - ---~~ --- -----,·- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ,;

--------- - ----~ -- ,j



## I 

# I I ! I

# I I Circulated 04/29/2016 02:24 PM; i l i q



### --- - - -- - -- - -- --- - --,· '-,
--- ------ - -- - -- - - - -- -- -- -

1 ! 'i 2

c. The car was parked on the street by Albemarle Park. a car ; there were also two small dogs inside the vehicle. b. Allegations received were that the mother and the minor child were "living out of' child, [S.K.], due to allegations of homelessness and lack of supervision. a. On or about August 3, 2013 , [the Agency] received a referral regarding the minor Agency on August 5, 2013. The allegations included: 5. An Application for Emergency Custody in the related Dependency action was filed by the Adjudication. rights have also been terminated; the reasons for that termination are set forth in a separate 

### 4. 2. st.~K··· (hereinafter "S.K.") was born November 27 , 2011. 3. 

# A. IP KS 

# Bl •(hereinafter " Mother") is the natural mother of S.K. as above with no objection. Common Plea s in York County was incorporated into the Orphans' Court record docketed 1. The record docketed at CP-67-DP-170-2013 with the Clerk of Courts in the Court of FINDINGS OF FACT K 

## DJ 

# 9 $\ is GRANTED for the reasons outlined herein. record, the Petition for I nvoluntary Termination of Parental Rights of Mother to S.A. Based upon the evidence presented at the hearings, and upon consideration of the 

# ii /1 comply with the specific timeline set forth. Therefore , she was deemed to have waived the presentation of additional evidence.

:1
' I : 1 :i :i ; i 1 i 

# !I ---··---- · ··· · ,·· · -·· - - - ~ - - -- - - ------ ·~ ' • · · ·· - · " --·-·----

# I

ii 'I ! 1 1 1 

## ll I : H It 

### ii ii 

# l l ii Ji I ! '. I 

### It iJ ) l I i 

## i '

- - - - 

# ~ '-

- ---- - - - rJ , ; 

### "
. , - - - - - - - · -· -- - - · -- - · - - - - ---+- · 3 admitte d on a 3 02 commi tm e n t. n. The Yo rk City Pol i ce D epartm e nt t ook twenty-f o ur hour protec tiv e c u s tody o f th e minor c hild on Augu s t 3, 201 3
.
o. On Au g ust 4 , 2013, [the 

### Court] wa s contac te d and verbally awarded temp o rary legal and phy s i cal cu s to dy of th e mi n o r c hil d, [S.K) , to [ th e Agency) fo r conti nued fo s ter -c are pla ce ment. 1 m . The mother w as tran s ported t o the Y o rk Ho sp ital P s ychiatric Unit w h ere s h e wa s n o t provide an y inform ation. l. The m o ther fu rther state d th at h er m oth er an d h er siste r were alcoh o l ics an d w ould provid e h is a ddre s s o r te leph o n e numb er. k. The m o ther stated th at the father w as a 

# D- CS 7, h o wever, was un able to J
. The Y o rk City Polic e w ere c o ntacte d and respo nd e d to the s c e ne. erati call y [si c ]
. 1. Upon the m o ther's re turn to h e r ve hicle, s h e wa s alleg ed ly a cti n g and speakin g h

. The w o man s to od by the car and watc hed th e minor c hild. th e m o ther le ft her s on and th e two s mall d ogs in th e car. g . The m an and the m o th er got i nto hi s car an d drov e the m an ' s dog t o a veterin ari an; f. The man ' s d og jump e d out of his car and w a s hit by anoth e r ve hicl e. e . Th e woman re que s te d that h er son a s s ist and he drov e ov er t o the m o ther 's v e hicl e . d

. Th e m o ther re que s ted a wom an to ass i s t her in " jump s tarti n g" th e v e hicl e. d if 

## ! i ; : I I, L 

## · , i ·



# - --~ 'j4 : 1 new counsel entered an appearance or Mother executed an entry of appearance form. secure alternate counsel. Attorney Woodward a g reed ·to remain Mother's counsel until · Mother. At the time of the October 7, 2013 expedited review, Mother indicated a desire to filed on August 20, 2013, the Court appointed Attorney Gillian Woodward to represent 

# I 9
. Mother requested county-paid court-appointed counsel on August 19, 2013. 

### In an Order 

## I; 

# ! I I :1



### · , I I .'!
. ,

~ - f ~---- -·---- .. --------------------- -- ---------

and Fluphenazine. c. The mother allegedly has mental health issues and is prescribed Carbamazephine she will be staying with her dogs in a hotel until she secures that apartment, b. The mother indicated she is in the process of securing an apartment from a friend; dogs. living with a friend in York, Pennsylvania but cannot continue there because of her a. The mother was discharged from York Hospital on August 7, 2013 and has been for Emergency Custody, but included several additional averments, including: forth in the Dependency Petition were consistent with the allegations in the Appl i cation 8. A Dependency Petition was filed regarding S.K. on August 14, 2015. The allegations set afforded supervised visitation with Mother twice per week. were awarded to the Agency. S.K.'s placement in foster care continued. Mother was 7. A Shelter Care Order was filed on August 13, 2013. Legal and physical custody of S.K. Summons was entered on August 5, 2013. i'



# ..... ir
-~~~ ;r~: to Reaffirm d~e ~:,;a~ - ~~~= :~s~-;:cdule Protective Custody Hearing, and
!- ~ - - - - · - - · -----t-1--------------- -- 5 screens of parents and maternal grandparents [B.. W • 

## S and C4 

# a f. [The Court specified the following tests to occur]: random drug and alcohol e. The current placement goal for the Child is adoption. d. The child is safe in the current placement setting. view toward possible placement of the child with the maternal grandmother. c. placement is the least restrictive alternative available. minor child at this time and no relative has yet been approved, whereby foster-care Jess restrictive alternative available, in that: neither parent is a resource for the is the least restrictive alternative that meets th e needs of the child and there is no b. [S.K.] is to be placed, by the agency, in foster-care placement. [S.K.]'s placement He does admit to paternity. admission. Father acknowledges that he is not a resource for the child at this time. at this po i nt. She has recently been released from [York] Hospital after a 302 a. Mother is returning to the home of her husband, but does not have stable housing in that Order include, but are not limited to: Order are hereby incorporated as if set forth more fully herein. The findings of the Court consideration of the petition and by the agreement of all parties. The contents of that Order of Adjudication and Disposition was entered on August 20, 2013 after



# I I i i i 

# ii

, : ' ·11··· 

### IO. An 

# i!6 Works. d. Mother shall cooperate with the following services ... in-home team[,] Justice Square or another qualified counselor. the results made known to the Agency within 60 days of today ' s date. The named

1 1 person(s) shall follow through with any recommendations made as a result of any J ! 1 j evaluation conducted in this matter. 

## I : ! I c. Mother shall attend counseling sessions with Wellspan Behavioral health at Edgar

evaluation, within 10 days of this date, and the evaluation shall be completed, and appropriate organization or evaluator approved by the Agency to do the evaluator. The named person(s) shall contact the designated evaluator , or an performed by agreed upon evaluator or another appropriate organization or b. Mother shall cooperate in obtaining a psychological evaluation which shall be proof of such to the Agency. shall maintain stable , lawful income to support the minot(s}, and shall provide a. Mother shall maintain safe, stable and appropriate housing for the minor(s) and following: Order, the Court ordered certain directives, which included but were not limited to the 11. As part of the Court-Ordered Services/Conditions appendixed to the August 20, 2013

placement. Agency] for continued foster-care placement until further review for family g. Legal and physical custody of the minor child, [S.K.], shall continue in [the --------------~- - -- -- - - - , . i ! I :I i:

----------- - --------- -- - ~- - i ~~ - - -- - - - -
1 I 1: i,:i



# :i l CPC is the Community Progress Council. The Court is familiar with this community program that promotes ir self-sufficiency for low- to moderate-income residents of York County. CPC provides emergency assistance 

### ! with food , heat, and other basic needs , as well as assistance with housing. I! 7 :1 

## I wished to obtain alternative counsel and give the new counsel the opportunity to review 

# I

Ir the case. f l ! t q 

### n i l : [ Ii ! t until January 29, 2014 at Mother's request. She requested the continuance because she 16. A Permanency Review hearing originally scheduled for January 21, 2014 was continued she has received. January 10, 2014. The Court granted the request, provided Mother paid for each transcript 15. Mother, through Attorney Woodward , filed a Request for Release of Transcripts on 14. Mother requested assistance from CPC. 1 She was denied assistance. Court approved partially unsupervised contact. 13. By November 13, 2013, Mother was exercising three visits per week. At that time, the Court have been incorporated as if set forth more fully herein. 12. A 45-Day Expedited Review occurred on October 7, 2013. The findings made by the g. Parents shall e xecute an acknowledgement of paternity. discharge from Wellspan Crisis. f. [Mother] will cooperate and comply with the recommendations made upon his visit. to 11 :00 a.m. on Tuesday and Thursday. Father shall contact Agency to schedule e. Supervised visitation at [the Agency] between [S.K.] and [Mother] from 9:00 a.m. ---------+:------------ - -- · · · ··· · ·· · ··· · -----------8 proof of such to the Agency. shall maintain stable, lawful income to support the minor(s), and shall provide a. Mother shall maintain safe, stable and appropriate housing for the minor(s) and following: Order , the Court ordered certain directives, which included but were not limited to the f. Placement of the Child remains in foster-care placement with 

# R-

and e. Legal and physical custody shall remain with [the AgencyJ. the child is placement with a fit and willing relative. three to six months, but unlikely in that time. The concurrent placement plan for due to lack of progress by his parents. It is hopeful that he can be returned 

### wi thin projected date by which the goal for the child might be achieved is undetermined d. The current placement goal for the child is return to parent or guardian. The necessitated placement ... c. [Mother has made] minimal progress toward alleviating the circumstances which b. There has been minimal compliance with the permanency plan as to the mother. .. a. The placement of the child continues to be necessary and appropriate. herein. The Court's findings included, but were not limited to:



# i i 18. As part of the Court-Ordered Services/Conditions appendixed to the January 29, 2014 

# I I 

# I i I ' 1/ I ; 

# r made various findings and directives. The Order is incorporated as if set forth more fully I

# ll 17. A Permanency Review Order was entered on January 29, 2014. In said Order, the Court
11 ------··-·-·-·---··- · · · ·· ----- -------· - ··---- . 1 I, [:

-----~! t----, -,- ~ -·- . 't10

i ii 'i 

## Cl.f:

B .. C 1 ' 1

1 1 has not shown any interest in his son. 

## ii JI e. Legal and physical custody shall remain with 

### [the Agency]. 

## I! f. Placement of the Child remains in foster-care placement with 

# R... and Ii i! indicated that she is not a resource for Child. Father has not had any contact and

resource for the child. Although the maternal grandmother has contact, she has progress by the parents and failure of any viable family to come forward to be a for the child, including change of the concurrent goal to adoption given the lack of be modified or supplemented as follows: ... Agency to explore permanency options this child, dated January 29, 2014 ... is appropriate and feasible except that it shall is placement with a fit and willing relative. The permanency plan developed for due to lack of progress by his parents. The concurrent placement plan for the child projected date by which the goal for the child might be achieved is undetermined d. The 

### current placement goal for the child is return to parent or guardian. The necessitated placement ... c. [Mother has made] no progress toward alleviating the circumstances which b. There has been minimal compliance with the permanency plan as to the mother ... a. The placement of the child continues to be necessary and appropriate. herein. The Court's findings included, but were not limited to: made various findin g s and directives. The Order is incorporated as if set forth more fully 23. A Permanency Review Order was entered on June 23, 2014. In said Order, the CourtI! j ! ;: I I ' I ! ; b. There has been minimal compliance with the permanency plan as to the mother.

..

a. The placement of the child continues to be necessary and appropriate. 28. A Blended Perspective Meeting was held November 4, 2014. 

# I 29. During one of S.K. 's medical appointments, Mother left twice to check on her dogs. 

## I· J/ 30. A Permanency Review Order was entered on December 3, 2014. In said Order, the Court

JI 

# i i made various findings and directives. The Order is incorporated as if set forth more fully 

## ii 

# i i herein. The Court's findings included, but were not limited to: as if set forth more fully herein. 27. 

### A Status Hearing Order was entered on September 22, 2014. Its contents are incorporated repeated expressed desire to represent herself. 26. On June 23, 2014, the appointment of Attorney Woodward was vacated due to Mother's sessions decreased eventually to bi-weekly. 25. From January until April 2014, Ms. Hill was meeting with Mother twice per week. The c. Mother shall cooperate with ... Justice Works. Counseling. b. Mother shall attend counseling sessions ... The counseling shall be Individual proof of such to the Agency. shall maintain stable, lawful income to support the minor(s), and shall provide a. Mother shall maintain safe, stable and appropriate housing for the minor(s) and the Court ordered certain directives, which included but were not limited to the following: 

## !I l :

. It

_ _ J __ 

# r 24. As part of the Court-Ordered Services/Conditions appendi~ed to the June 23, 2014 Order,12 account and paid utility receipts. c. Mother 

### will provide the Agency with pay stubs, paid rent receipts or escrow Counseling. b. Mother shall attend counseling sessions

... The counseling shall be Individual proof of such to the Agency. shall maintain stable , lawful income to support the minor(s), and shall provide a. Mother shall maintain safe, stable and appropriate housing for the minor(s) and following: Order, the Court ordered certain directives, which included but were not limited to the 31. As part of the Cerni-Ordered Services/Conditions appendixed to the December 3, 2014 

### f. Placement of the Child remains in foster-care placement e. Legal and physical custody shall remain with [the Agency]. goal given the lack of progress by [S.K. ]' s parents. adoption.

. .. the concurrent goal shall be pursued by the Agency as the primary [Mother's] lack of progress. The concurrent placement plan for the child is projected date by which the goal for the child might be achieved is unlikely given i ! Ji 

# 11- -· ~--- -·

. I c. [Mother has made] minimal progress toward alleviating the circumstances which

1 / necessitated placement.

..

d. The current placement goal for the child is return to parent or guardian. The I · ' i ,!!

,. , · 

## ! i 13 documents, the Court was unable to timely rule upon them. became independently aware of the existence of the documents. Without notice of the 2015. No Certificates of Service were filed regarding these petitions. The Court later "Petition/Motion for the Request of Following Transcripts Listed Below" on January 2, handwritten and others modified by Mother , were attached to the petition. She also filed a Hearing Held December 3, 2014" on January 2, 2015. A number of documents, some also filed a document she titled a "Petition/Motion for Appeal of Child Dependency 36. Mother filed a Petition for Leave to Proceed 

### In Fonna Pauperis on January 2, 2015. She Father was filed on December 16, 2014. 35. The Petition for Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights related to both Mother and by the Agency. 34. On December 16, 2014, the Petition for Hearing to Change Cami-Ordered Goal was filed either hearing for the Court's consideration. admitted to the record, the document labeled by Mother was not entered as an exhibit at DEPENDENCY HEARING 12/03/14." Although a copy of the same report was later September 19, 2014 labeled, "Exhibit B FOR STATUS HEARING 9/22/14 & FOR 33. On December 12, 2014, Mother filed a copy of a Mental Health Update Report dated any point in time." She has not provided this documentation to the Agency at any time. time during this month process, I would have provided a prescription bottle or script at declining testing. Mother stated 

### "[i]f [the prescription] was such an issue [ at] any point in i


## , I ii '

·-----------··--·- · · · - ·· .. ~ -- -----~ ----~- 

## I 32. On November 6 , 2014, Mother provided a written explanation as to why she was 

# I14



# ! i

ti :J r : i ) stipulation. The Court did not consider 

### it in rendering its Order in this matter. 

# i i 41. A Stipulation of Counsel was filed on February I 8, 20 1 5. Mother did not agree to the i ! ' ! Mother. Mother received personal notice on February 20 , 2015 of the continued hearing. change the Court-ordered goal and for the involuntary termination petition as it related to Court would hear evidence on the ninety-day Status Hearing and on the petitions to continued the remainder of the hearing to March 12, 2015 at 9 :00 a.m. At that time, the 

# I i IJ ! I

· 1 1 1 

# II Ji 

## ! I i i 

# I i d H the Court did hear evidence on the termination petition as it related to Father and February 20, 2015 hearing, but did not waive any defect in service. On February 20, 2015, Change of Goal. Mother was not timely served notice of the hearing. She did appear at the 2015 hearing related to the Petitions for Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights and 40. On January 29, 2015, Father was personally and timely served notice of the February 20 , transcripts. forwarded to counsel and Mother. No Order was entered directing release of the Reporters by the Clerk of Court s and transcripts were produced. The transcripts were 39. The request for transcripts Mother made on January 2, 2015 was forwarded to the Court Matters Filed on the Appeal on January 30, 2015. consideration. In any event, it was not timely filed. Mother filed a Concise Statement of been recognized as a Notice of Appeal and was not forwarded to the Superior Court for of Child Dependency Hearing Held on 12-3-2014." The petition does not appear to have 38. On January 7, 2015, Mother filed a document she titled a "Petition/Motion for an Appeal ----·-··-·· .. · - · ·· · ·· - · - · · · - · + ·---- ···------- - -----------·-· ---+i ;

_______ -- - - - - - ---~---~ 11 / 37. A Permanency Meeting was held on January 5, 2015.44. A Status Hearing Order was entered on March 12, 2015. Its contents are incorporated as if



# I set forth more full y herein. 

## i 11 

# i i 45. The Court denied the Change of Goal petition on March 20 , 2015. 1 ! 1 : 

# i i I ! : l 2 The Order was entered March 13, 2015 with the Clerk of Courts and March 17, 2015 with the Orphans' Court, 1: !i Mother received notice of the Order by her own admission as early as March 16, 2015. 

# i i 15 

## ! i couns e l. She did not. did not appear timely. Mother was directed to provide copies of her proposed exhibits to therefore was deemed to have waived the right to present the additional evidence. Mother schedule for presentation of that evidence. Mother did not comply with the schedule and additional evidence. The Court entered an Order on March 13, 2015 2 setting forth a exhibits would result in that individual waiving his or her opportunity to present Counsel and Mother were notified that failure to timely appear or to timely exchange opportunity to propose exhibits for entry into the record for the Court ' s consideration. directed to appear at 8:30 a.m. on March 20, 2015 to provide Mother with an additional precluded from presenting evidence to support her case. Counsel and Mother were 43. At the close of the hearing on March 12, 2015, Mother indicated that she was bein g not present. Mother did not appear until 2:54 p.m. without explanation. p.m. After waiting for a few minutes, the Court reconvened at 2:37 p.m. Mother was still told counsel and Mother it would reconvene at 2:35 p.m. Mother did not appear at 2:35 approximately 9: 12 a.m. Later that day, the Court took a recess at 2:26 p.m. and the Court 

## !i : ! l ' :--4-2-. T-l-1e_i\_1_ai-·c_h_1_2_, _2_0_1_5_1-1e_a_n-.n-g-,,- , a-s_s_c_h_e-du_l_e_d_t_o_b_e_g1-.n-a-t -9-:0

_ 0_: : ~~1: · · - ~~~;h-e1-· -a-n-·i\-,e-d-at-1 - ~ 

## I; 

### ~~~~~~~~~ ~-~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~- 16 the course of S.K.'s adjudication. Mother wrote out reasons for refusing the test each time until she obtained copies of transcripts from the Cami proceedings that occurred during thirteen times between October 17, 2014 and February 20 , 2015; she refused to be tested where the entryway to Mother's residence was located. Mother refused to be tested Mother was deemed unavailable once due to the drug monitor's misunderstanding of 1 ! 

## ! ! 

## I I 1 1 

### , , [! 

## : i

, 1 i i 1 : 

### ' I ;/ i i 11 

# i i i ' : 1 r:..-..-- - ~ 

## !j : 1 week. Mother was successfully tested thirty-six times and was unavailable ten times. 52. A referral was received by FUN on August 20, 2013 to test randomly Mother once a 

### 51. A pre-adoptive resource has been identified. 50. S.K. is thriving in his foster home. I-Je is quick to show emotion to his foster family. 49. Father was unaware of S.K. 's existence until after the Agency became involved. 26, 2013; January 29 , 2014; June 23, 2014; and December 3 , 2014. 48. Four Family Service Plans were created for the family and were dated as follows: Au g ust of that meeting and there has been some compliance with that plan by Mother. grandmother, Ms. WfpQC, participated in that meeting. A plan was generated as a result Making meeting was held in this matter on November 18, 2013. Mother and maternal scheduled for September 30 , 2013 and was cancel e d by Mother. A Family Group Decision August 23, 20 I 3, but Mother was either not able to or did not participate. A FGDM was 47. Workers from the Family Group Decision Making (hereinafter "FGDM") service met on approximately seventeen months at the time of the termination hearing. "the Agency") caseworker assigned to the family. She was involved with the family for ' , , L 

## ·I 11 r·--~~: - Misty Stevenso11··;~:~~~he York County Office of Chil~~:~:.~=:~h & Families (hereinafter . 117 " :i ! l



## - --- --' :.-i f-- -----------

;1

' I i' paystubs to the Agency , both from the crab shack. She at times requested financial crab shack and various other restaurants. However, Mother has provided only two legal 1 : j j

_ : ; :1 I' returned home. 2014. Justice W arks labeled the closure as unsuccessful because S .K
. had not been demonstrate an ability to progress substantially. Services closed out on Septembe r 26, 

# I

· 1 

## I, 

## ii I i l j 

# I :

' I 

## i l 54. Since the adjudication of S.K. , Mother has reportedly obtained various jobs, including at a Ii 

### lt appointments last minute. Mother was generally compliant with the service , but did not Mother sometimes did not show or was tardy to appointments and at other times cancelled as a collective effort. Mother was to meet with Ms. Nulph two to three times per week. management; and (7) demonstrate basic employability skills. The goals were established communication skills with the team; (6) demonstrate a basic understanding o f household needs; (4) seek appropriate means of transportation; (5) demonstrate effective sufficiency; (2) participate in meaningful supervised visits; (3) address mental health She also helped Mother establish and work toward seven goals: 

### (I) demonstrate basic selfbegin services on August 13, 2013. Ms. Nulph supervised visits between Mother and S.K. Resource Specialist assigned to work with Mother. Justice Works received a referral to 53. Tiffany Nulph was a Justice Works YouthCare (hereinafter "Justice Works") Family THC on February 27, 2015. of those tests were positive for marijuana. Mother tested positive for both Adderall and positive for Adderall, a medication Mother claims is prescribed to her. Additionally, four she refused. She tested positive twenty-seven times. All of those twenty-seven tests were 

# I

· ~~~~~ ~ . ~~~~[

### ----~ ~- . - ~,'} +-

----- 1 : ! : ,. I 8 May 15 , 2015; at the Motel 6 in York from May 18 , 2014 until June 28 , 2014; with a until April 24, 2014; with a friend named Terry on South Street from April 25 , 2014 until 2014 until March 9, 2014; at the Motel 6 in York, Pennsylvania from March IO, 2014 friend named Patricia at 1000 Country Club Road in York, Pennsylvania from February 2, Colony Drive in York, Pennsylvania from January 2, 2014 until February 1 , 2014; with a 

# I ii Ii 11 

## ! I 

# I i I' ) ) .I 

# il i i December 23, 2013 until January 2 , 2014; with a friend named Benjamin Hoover on the Midway Hotel, Chateau Motel, and the Travelodge at various times between Pennsylvania from December 18, 2013 until December 22, 2013; with the same friend at Hotel from December 13, 2013 until December 17, 2013; at the Super 8 Motel in York, Pennsylvania from August 20, 2013 until December 12, 2013; with a friend at the Midway August 2013: at an efficiency in the Midway Hotel at 211 North Main Street in York, Agency was aware of the following addresses for Mother since the adjudication of S 

### .K. in Dependency Petition was filed, Mother was residing at 1630 Randow Road in York. The the York Hospital Psychiatric Unit, but had been residing in her car. At the time the 57. At the time of the Application for Emergency Custody, the Agency averred Mother was at 56. Mother was involuntarily hospitalized from August 4, 2013 until August 7, 2013. 55. Mother's vehicle is not a reliable means of transportation. self-employment, but has not filed the document. an affidavit on December 12, 2014 indicating her intent to file a document to establish services and has provided five receipts from those services in January of 2014. She signed assistance from churches. Mother also reports earning money by providing spiritual ------ · · -- --- - - - · - ---------- - - - - - - ------- · - - ------- ----i :

/ j o n th e doo r. He beg an o pen ing up afte r three months. S
. K
. 's b as i c n e eds are met by hi s ; ! i : / j I/ 1 1 i : 1 9 fJ , , ! i i i ,' m oth er and M s . 

## W4'J I) c oope rate with on e anoth er t o sc h edule th ese v is i t s .


# ,j 63
. S .K. refers t o M oth er as "Mo mmy " or 

# " Al U . . .. H e refers t o hi s fos ter m o th er a s 

## ! , " Mommy , " "Mommy T wo," o r " M o mmy 

## Cit A"

11 6 4. S.K
. h as been w ith hi s foster family fo r nin e te en -and- a-h al f month s . Wh en he fir st was 

# I i I I pl ac e d with th e foster famil y, h e w as very reserved and w o uld hi d e if s om eo n e kn oc ked 62. S.K. co ntinu es to h av e cont a ct multiple tim es per month with M s . 

## Wdllt? Hi s fo ster can cele d

. Alth o ugh fre quently t ardy , M o ther n o w typi c ally arrive s wi thin th at w ind ow . 6 1
. 

### If M o th er h as not arri v ed w i thin twe nty mi nutes o f th e sc h e du l e d vi s it , the vi s it r s 6 0. Mo th er has v aricos e v e ins affec tin g at l e ast one l e g . 5 9
. Moth er is o fte n tardy. 5 8
. Moth er i s o fte n n o t forthcomin g wi th inform ation. th e A g e ncy t o vi s i t h er res id e n ce s . Moth er's ro o m at th e Sup er 8 Mote l. Mo th er wa s no t alw ay s avai l ab l e durin g attemp t s b y visite d by th e Ag e ncy and were fo und n o t to b e s uitabl e re sid e nces fo r reunification : and th e 33 9 W es t M ai n S tree t ap artmen t i n D all as to w n . T he fo ll o win g locati o n s were and w ere d ee m e d s uit ab l e re s i d e n ces fo r re un i fic ati o n: the effi ci ency at th e M i d w ay Hote l and th ereafter on Eas t Kin g S treet. T he foll o win g l oc ation s were v isi te d b y th e Age n cy Stree t in D all as town , P enn sy lvani a fr om J u l y 19 , 2 0 14 unti l som e time in F ebru ary 201 5; fri e n d o n Roos evelt A venu e from June 29, 2 014 u ntil Jul y 18 , 2 014 ; at 33 9 W es t Main 

### j ! :1

·- - -- - - - - .. · · ·- ··- -- - : i

__ , ~- --- -- - - - · - ·--· -- - - ---- - ~ - - - - - - - ----20 having adjustment disorder, unspecified, and attention deficit disorder by history. [ ! therapy. In January 20 I 4 , Mother was diagnosed by her current therapist, Deborah Hill, as i:' 1 : cannabis dependence. Recommendations included medication and to participate in at Edgar Square in September 2013 revealed similar concerns with bipolar disorder and 

# I I! [ !

, I r : disorder, not otherwise specified; cannabis abuse; and nicotine dependency. 

### An evaluation abuse; upon discharge from the 302 hospitalization, the diagnosis was recorded as mood was recorded as bipolar effective disorder, most recent episode manic; rule out cannabis evaluated: In August 2013, during Mother's 302 hospitalization, the tentative diagnosis 69. Different diagnoses have been suggested as a result of Mother's mental health being 68. Other than Adderall, Mother does not want to take prescription medication. 67. Mother has attended S.K. ' s medical appointments. 66. Mother has at times randomly provided S.K. with gifts. pursuant to the April 21, 2014 Status Hearing Order. minute phone call with S.K. on Monday mornings. The phone calls were permittedMother has never progressed to visiting S.K. unsupervised. She is also permitted a fiveaffection and th e two play together or watch videos. Her visits are partially supervised. visits with S.K. per week for two hours at a time. During visits, Mother shows S.K. 65. By the time of the evidentiary h e aring on March 12, 2015, Mother was permitted three is okay once Mother arrives. foster family. He sometimes expresses displeasure at attending visits with Mother, but he --------------------· - --- -- -· ··-··- · -·

------- . ~~ - -21 Children, Youth & Families Exhibit 8 ; Children, Youth & Families Exhibit 9; Children, Exhibit 

### J; Children, Youth & Families Exhibit 6; Children, Youth & Families Exhibit 7; 2015. warrant resulted in Mother's incarceration from February 20, 2015 until February 23, 72. Warrants have been issued for Mother's arrest during S.K.'s adjudication. The most recent 71. Mother is diagnosed with attention deficit disorder. continue in counseling. one session by phone in November. Ms. Hill believes there is still a need for Mother to face-to-face session in January; one session in December; two face-to-face sessions and 2015 hearing; she had two sessions in February, one by phone and one in face-to-face; one 2014 until March 2015: Mother did not have any sessions in March prior to the March 12, twenty to thirty minutes. Mother had the following .sessions with Ms. Hill from November sessions last approximately sixty to eighty minutes; phone sessions last approximately Hill permits Mother to engage in either office sessions or phone sessions. In-office with Ms. Hill was initially every week, but then was reduced to every other week. Ms. counseling. Mother has engaged in twenty-seven sessions with Ms. Hill. Mother's contact be on trauma and grief. Mother contacted Ms. Hill in December of 2013 to begin 70. Deborah Hill is a licensed clinical social worker with her own practice. Her focus tends to 

# II - : !



### - - · - - ·· ·- -ij ii 

## I. 73. The following exhibits were admitted into evidence; Mother's Exhibit A; Mother's 

# II 1 1 l Ii l l 

### ! j



## . . 

# il Ii Youth & Famili e s Exhibit 10; and Children, Youth & Families Exhibit 11. I i- -- --·-- · - -· -- - -- ·· ---! 22 3 Certain exhibits were not admitted for consideration a s those documents relate to the petition against Mother; however , c ertain of these exhibits were admitted for consideration as those documents relate to the petition against Father. (8) The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the court or under a voluntary agreement with the agency , 12 months or more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, the conditions which led to the removal or 

## *** (5) The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the court or under a voluntary agreement with an agency for a period of at least six months, the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child continue to exist, the parent cannot or will not remedy those conditions within a reasonable period of time, the services or assistance reasonably available to the parent are not likely to remedy the conditions which led to removal or placement of the child within a reasonable period of time and termination of parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child. 

## *** (1) The parent by conduct continuing for a period of at least six months immediately prec e ding the filing of the petition either has evidenced a settled purpose of relinquishing parental claim to a child or has refused or failed to perform parental duties. (2) The repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal of the parent has caused the child to be without essential parental care, control or subsistence necessary for his physical or mental well-being and the conditions and causes of the incapacity, abuse , neglect or refusal cannot or will not be remedied by the parent. of the Adoption Act. The applicable provisions appear as follows: Mother to S.K. on the grounds presented in 23 Pa. C.S. 

### § 2511 (a)(l), (a)(2), (a)(5), and (a)(8) The Agency petitioned this Court to involuntarily terminate the parental rights of DISCUSSION Families Exhibit 5. 3 document Mother referred to as Exhibit O that is unlabeled; and Children, Youth & D; Mother's Exhibit I; Mother's Exhibit M; Mother's Exhibit N; Mother ' s Exhibit K; a -------- - ~i

_



## ·, 

# I

. I 

## p ,j 11 i ! 

# I ! I

. 

## r I q

--- -- - · · -- ·- - -·· l t -

· 1 

# ·---------.-. -· 1L
.. ·------

1 ! /I 74. The following exhibits were not admitted for the Court's consid eration: Mother's Exhibit 

## /I•- ~-

Pa.C.S. 

### § 2511 (a)(2). The process of reunification or adoption should be completed 

### wi thin 23 applicable, for consideration in the dependency matter. See In re D. C.D., 105 A.3d 662 

## : ! j (Pa.Super. 2014). The statute does not alter or effect the provisions for consideration under 

# ! i Section 2511 of the Adoption Act. The provisions of Section 251 l(a) establish six and twelve
I ' l f ,, J ! month timelines. 23 Pa.C.S. 

### § 251 l(a)(l), (a)(5), (a)(8). Other provisions do not require that a 

# i i certain period of time lapse before termination of parental rights can be sought. Id. at 23 42 Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 6531 (f)(9). However, the aforementioned statute creates an exemption, if



### If the child has been in placement for at least 15 of the last 22 months or the court has determined that aggravated circumstances exist and reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate the need to remove the child from the child's parent, guardian or custodian or to preserve and reunify the family need not be made or continue to be made, whether the county agency has filed or sought to join a petition to terminate parental rights and to identify, recruit, process and approve a qualified family to adopt the child unless: (i) The child is being cared for by a relative best suited to the physical , mental and moral welfare of the child; (ii) The county agency has documented a compelling reason for determining that filing a petition to terminate parental rights would not serve the needs and welfare of the child, or (iii) The child's family has not been provided with necessary services to achieve the safe return to the child's parent, guardian or custodian within the time frames set forth in the permanency plan. parties at hearings and reads: Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 6531 (f)(9), which appears on the Permanency Review Orders provided to the adoption is not even addressed until fifteen months has passed. Confusion may stem from 42 The Court notes that, at the termination hearing, Mother voiced a concern that 23 Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 251 l(a)(l), (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(8). ' ' I 

### ,-·,:~ ------------------ . . .. 

## __ , 

## _ ) ' ,./ placement of the child continue to exist and termination of parental rights would

• 1 best serve the needs and welfare of the child. 

## !---- -- ~- ! -- !; !i

· 1 i i 

### · · - · · - · · - ·-- - - 4 ,-i
-------------- - - ---· · -- ···- ·- · · ~-------- 24 '. / (j to obstacles may forfeit his or her parental rights. In re Involuntary Termination of Parental 

### i i : : obstacles. Id. (citing In re Shives, 525 A.2d 801, 803 (Pa.Super. 1987)). A parent who yields 

# " Because a child needs more than a benefactor , parental duty requires that a

parent 'exert himself to take and maintain a place of importance in the child's 

### life.' 

## !I 

# II II Ji 1 1 Ji 

### Id. ( citing In re Burns, 3 79 A.2d 535 (Pa. 1977)). A parent must make a "sincere and genuine i i l l 

### !i effort" to maintain a relationship, use all available resources to preserve the bond, and resist
ft This affirmative duty encompasses more than a financial obligation; it requires

continuing interest in the child and a genuine effort to maintain communication and association with the child. There is no simple or easy definition of parental duties. Parental duty is best understood in relation to the needs of a child. A child needs love, protection, guidance, and support. These needs, physical and emotional, cannot be met by a merely passive interest in the development of the child. Thus, this court has held that the parental obligation is a positive duty which requires affirmative performance. The Supreme Court of this Commonwealth has stated: circumstances clearly warrants the involuntary termination." Id. explanations offered by the parent to determine it the evidence in light of the totality of the of the court to "examine the individual circumstances o f each and every case and consider all "applied mechanically." In Interest of A.P. , 692 A.2d 240, 245 (Pa.Super. 1997). 

### It is the role (Pa. 1998)). Also, the six month time period established by Section 2511 (a)(l) should not be 457 , 461 (Pa.Super. 2003) (citing Matter of Adoption of Charles 

### E.D.li1., II, 708 A.2d 88 , 91 both an intent to relinquish and a failure to perform necessary duties. In re C.M.S. , 832 A.2d To terminate pursuant to Section 251 l(a)(l), the A g ency need not produce evidence of eighteen months. 

### R.JS., 901 A.2d at 507 (internal citations omitted). ---·-···----·---:----------- ----------- - · -- - · · " · • · · ·-- - ~ - · -- • ·'' • '" " · - -·----··-- ----· - ---- w - - - { ~~ I 25 also to Section 2511 (a)(5). (citing In re D.A.T., 91 A.3d 197 (Pa.Super. 2014)). This Court believes this principle applies that

... section 251 l(a)(8) has been satisfied." In re T.A.C., --- A.3d ---, *2 (Pa.Super. 2015) conditions that led to a child's removal, but other conditions still exist, a court may find Pursuant to Section 2511 (a)(8), " ... [ w ]here a parent has addressed some of the 

### Id. at 1117-18. Therefore, the language in subsection (a)(2) should not be read to compel courts to ignore a child's need for a stable home and strong, continuous parental ties , which the policy of restraint in state intervention is intended to protect. This is particularly so where disruption of the family has already occurred and there is no reasonable prospect for reuniting 

### it. [Id.] Thus, while "sincere efforts to perform parental duties," can preserve parental rights under subsection 

### (a)(l ), those same efforts may be insufficient to remedy parental incapacity under subsection (a)(2). [internal citations omitted). "Parents are required to make diligent efforts toward the reasonably prompt assumption of full parental responsibilities." [internal citations omitted]. in which this subsection should be interpreted by this Court: being." Id. (citing E.A.P. , 944 A.2d at 82). The Superior Court has furth er explained the wayessential parental care, control, or subsistence necessary for his physical or mental well797 A.2d 326, 337 (Pa.Super. 2002)). Subsection (a)(2) emphasizes the child's "need for affirmative misconduct. In re Z.P., 994 A.2d 1108 , 1117 (Pa.Super. 20 l 0)( citing In re A.L.D., (Pa. 1976)). Whether termination is appropriate under Section 2511 (a)(2) is not limited to 2008) (hereinafter "E.A.P.") (citing 23 Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 251 l(a)(2); see In re R.I., 361 A.2d 294 Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights to E.A.P., a Minor, 944 A.2d 79, 82 (Pa.Super. Section 251 l(a)(2) focuses on the child's present and future need for proper care. I n re Rights to E.A.P., a Minor, 944 A.2d at 83 (citing In re A.L.D., 797 A.2d at 340). - ~ -- - · ·· · · · -------- i ! 

## : I

# : i
: 1 26 continuity of relationships is important to children and also weigh the safety needs of the inquiry. In re C.A1.S., 884 A.2d 1284, 1287 (Pa.Super. 2005). The Court must consider that child , love , comfort, security, stability and other intangibles must be considered during the When determining whether termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the Id. in the hope that the parent will summon the ability to handle the responsibilities of parenting." 

### R.J.S. , 901 A.2d 502, 507 (Pa.Super. 2006)). " ... [A] child's life simply cannot be put on hold environment. See 

### In re K.M., 53 A.2d 781, 792 (Pa.Super. 2012) (citing 

### In re Adoption of 2006)(internal citations omitted). A child has the right to care in a p ermanent, healthy, safe h e althy , safe environment. " 

### In re Adoption of R.J.S. , 901 A.2d 502, 507 (Pa.Super. child's ri g ht to have prop er parenting and fulfillment of his or her potential in a permanent, of.. .her child is converted, upon the parent's failure to fulfill... her parental duties, to the 23 Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 251 l(b). "A parent's basic constitutional right to the custody and rearing

The court in terminating the rights of a parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare of the child. The rights of a parent shall not be terminated solely on the basis of environmental factors such as inadequate housing, furnishings, income , clothing and medical care if found to be beyond the control of the parent. With respect to any petition filed pursuant to subsection (a)(l) , (6), or (8), the court shall not consider any efforts by the parent to remedy the conditions described therein which are first i n itiated subsequent to the giving of notice of the filing of the petition. i 

### Once the Court has determined tl,a;~~~:;,:~:;f

- the statutory req:i,emcnts under

. · 1 · 

### § 2511 ( a) are satisfied, the Court must also engage in an analysis of"[ o ]ther considerations , " ) pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. 

### § 251 l(b): 

# i i ') •' '•27

2003)). precise facts in issue. " 

### Id. ( quoting In re JL. C. & JR. 

### C., 83 7 A.2d 124 7, 1251 (Pa.Super. enable the trier of fact to come to a clear conviction, without hesitance , of the truth of the convincing evidence is defined as evidence "so clear, direct, weighty and convincing as to 

## ,I (Pa.Super. 2009) (quoting In re SH., 879 A.2d 802 , 805 (Pa.Super. 2005)). Clear and 

# I

, 1 

## I · 1 1 ii I ' H u 1: 

## I i " j ! Ji 

## i i if 

## Ii termination are valid by "clear and convincing evidence." In re 

### R.NJ., 985 A.2d 273, 276 The party seeking termination of parental rights must demonstrate the asserted grounds for exists between the child and a parent. See In re ALM., 2014 WL 6756296 (Pa.Super. 2014). Superior Court, the Court is not required to ignore safety concerns simply because a bond factors the Court must consider. In re A.D., 93 A.3d at 897. As recently indicated by the best interests of the child. In re K.M., 53 A.3d 781, 791 (Pa.Super. 2012). 

### It is but one of the existence of an emotional bond does not preclude a determination that a termination is in the (Pa.Super. 2000) (citing In re William L., 383 A.2d 1228 , 1241 (Pa. 1992)). The mere parental ties is usually "extremely painful." In Interest of C.S., 761 A.2d 1197, 1202 relationship." Id. When a child has a close relationship with a parent, severance of close determine whether its termination 'would destroy an existing, necessary, and beneficial child. The Court must "examine the status of the bond [between parent and ch i ld] to The Court is also required to analyze whether a bond exists between the parent and omitted). CS. , 761 A.2d 1197 , 1202 (Pa.Super. 2000)); In re A.D., 93 A.3d at 898 (internal citations child. In re Adoption of TB.B., 835 A.2d 387, 397 (Pa.Super. 2003)(citing In the Interest of ---·---- - ~ · · ··--~~--~ - ~~- - ··- ·- - ····--· · ····· - ---- ;I

### i 28 York." Mother also testified that S.K. "never " had any accidents with her, "not one time , " and with a family that lived on Argyle Street. 1074 Argyle Street ... They are scared of the system,

11 

### too, and they are people of God, because they were worried about getting involved because i' 

## i i one minute I was Jiving with them and the next minute I'm calling them from a psychiatric 1 : 

## I ! J/ ward to come pick me up, and they are like, whoa, you know?" This testimony indicates that
;i i i on August 3, 2013 Mother's address was 1074 Argyle Street. Later in her description of the 1 : 

## ! I same day, Mother described her address to the police officer as "
........ Street, ; 1 i j stated, "We didn't want to be there for six or seven hours. I had a place to live. I was living believes is the truth, even if she is mistaken. During her testimony on March 12, 2015, she discrepancies in Mother's testimony are not intentional, but rather Mother presents what she historically not forthcoming with information. The Court believes, that many of the At the outset, the Court did not find Mother to be a credible witness. Mother is is presented. only to the evidence presented, but takes into consideration the manner in which that evidence 

### Adoption of

R.JS., 90 l A.2d 502, 506 (Pa.Super. 2006)). This Court, therefore, considers not all, part, or none of the evidence." 

### In re N. C., 909 A.2d 818, 823 (Pa.Super. 2006)( citing 

### In re conflicts in the testimony. In carrying out these responsibilities, the

... court is free to believe charged with the responsibilities of evaluating credib i lity of the witnesses and resolving any Court to consider. The Court is not required to accept all statements as true. The Court "is not mean that the statement itself is considered fact or that the statement is evidence for the 

### i i 11



# -- - - --- II ~ - -- ;l,~~;:~p;e fact that something was stated and was memorialized in the transcript does 

# -r ~~ I, 

## I 

# Ii 

## i ,- ·-~- 29 Ii iJ i i !: " )! Mother engaged in sincere efforts to perform some parental duties sufficient for this 

### Section 2Sll(a)(2) Court does therefore decline to terminate Mother ' s rights pursuant to this subsection. 

### j. provides him with gifts. She has made a sincere effort to remain a part of S.K .' s life. The 

# ' I ], 

### if I , 

## I! :J 

# I i I , I i ; : ·1 ! i 

## Ii

1 1 [ Comito determine that the Agency did not carry its burden by clear and convincing evidence li with him once a week by phone. She attends some of S.K. 's medical appointments and keeps in contact with S.K. , visiting with him approximately three days per week and speaking 2013, Mother has continued to perform some parental duties on behalf of her son. Mother relinquish her parental rights to S.K. On the contrary, since the adjudication of S.K. in August No credible evidence was demonstrated that Mother demonstrated a settled purpose to 

### Section 2Sll(a)(l) rendering its determination on the termination petition. The Court took the Jack of credibility of both of these witnesses into consideration in adjudication. communicated with a number of other employers throughout the course of S.K.'s restaurant jobs, when a review of the record clearly indicates that Ms. Stevenson hersel f had components of her testimony. For example, Ms. Stevenson testified that Mother had two T he Court also did not find Ms. Stevenson to be a credible witness related to certain dishonesty. some of her testimony was clearly contradictory, inconsistent , or show e d evidence of then admitted that he "might hav e had one or two accidents with me." The Court finds that I. I I : 1
' :

# . , I 

## u

. I 30 Mother often moves from location to location, prioritizing her dogs over establishing stability. ,. /l 

## ! i j ! : I I housing. Mother often selected housing that was inappropriate for reunification purposes. to her dogs. During the course of S.K.'s adjudication, Mother was unable to maintain stable present , although she had been told about the visit earlier in the day; she called Ms. B
.. j , ! f when she was instructed not to do so ; and she left one of S.K. 's medical appoi n tments to tend 

### I, 1 1 1 1 I

. i i i i 

## I i d she appeared at a visit between S.K. and his grandmother, claiming she didn't know he was 

## Illlll9 detailed an incident where Mother chased S.K. around the backseat of the minivan; In addition to leaving her child with a s tranger, which led to the original placement, Ms. needs of her son and an inability to control her impulses and exercise proper judgment, to wit: safe environment for S.K. Her behavior demonstrates a clear lack of an ability to prioritize the Mother has not demonstrated an ability to operate in a fashion that would provide a incapacity will not be remedied by Mother, at least not within the forese e able future. and physical well-being. The credible evidence presented also indicates that the cause of the providin g S.K. the essential parental , care, control , and subsistence necessary for his mental S.K. The credible e vidence, however, does support a finding that Mother remains incapable of repeated and continued abuse or neglect of S.K. by Mother or a re fusal of Mother to parent Although the competent evidence presented does not suggest there is a question of supported by the record. Court to make a finding that a termination of parental rights under Section 2511 (a)(2) is Howev er , the Court does find that sufficient cre dible evidence was presented in order for the

of her parental rights pursuant to Section 2511 (a)(l) was appropriate. 

# I i that termination I i31

is inconsistent in treating her mental health. In periods of stress, particularly "around the of stress, though she does well when she has stable housing and a functioning vehicle. Mother by history. According to Ms. Hill, Mother's attention deficit disorder is exacerbated in periods I I after more than a year-and-a-half of Agency involvement. 

## ! Despite Mother's protestations that she does not have any mental health concerns, 

# Ji;1 " " ( I current counselor has labeled Mother with adjustment disorder and attention deficit disorder behasiortand lack of stability have led Mother's visits to remain partially sup ervised, even circumstances that necessitated placement. The continuing concerns related to Mother's no point during S.K. 's a djudication has she made substantial progress toward alleviating the with a stranger, rather than acknowledging the potential safety risk such conduct created. At physical and mental health concerns . Mother continues to attempt to justify abandoning S.K. on obtaining stable, appropriate housing; stable, consistent employment; or treating her was removed from her care by the police. Mother simply is not capable of directing her efforts approximately forty-five minutes at the termination hearing retelling the story of the day S.K. questionin g witnesses on statements they made nearly a year before and spending counsel. Mother continues to focus on determinations that have already been made, laughter and covering her face with papers during witnesses' responses to questions by frequent disruptive behavior and interruptions during the proceedings, such as her outbursts of limitations. Mother also, at times, acts erratically , evidenced before the Court during h er seeks employment doing jobs she cannot maintain considering her self-described physical ; 

## . . . . . . I

. Although she could detail a list of bills to be paid, she was unable to establish an income. She )--- - - · --- - ~~···· 32

Nulph never received proof of Mother's employment. prescription. Mother has never provided Ms. Egbert with a copy o f that prescription. Ms. documentation requested; for example, Ms. Egbert did request a copy of Mother ' s Adderall Mother decides what information Mother would like to provide. She does not provide termination from the crab shack, although she had been terminated at the time of the meeting. to assist Mother in the reunification effort. Mother, for example, did not disclose her communicate her absence, but she was not willing to fully cooperate with the service designed Mother obviously connected with Ms. Nulph, and would make most appointments or lacks the ability to exercise appropriate coping skills in her everyday life. implementation of coping skills in Mother's everyday life. This testimony suggests Mother from having the services provided by an in-home team, who could be with her to assist in the testified that Mother also continues to need counseling services and Mother could benefit her mental health reportedly prescribed. She self-medicates with marijuana. Ms. Hill credibly between October 17 , 2014 and February 20, 2015. She declines to take other medications for medication she is not supposed to consume. Mother refused to take tests for a period of time amphetamines. Conversely, assuming she does not have a prescription, she is often taking a not take it consistently; nine of the thirty-six successful attempts to test were negative for Also, assuming, 

### arguendo, Mother is prescribed Adderall for her diagnosis, she does participation in counseling since September or October 2014 as "sporadic." 

# ----------- ---- - -- -- ---- -- - i holidays" when Ms. Hill indicated Mother started to decline, Mother should seek additional 

# i ! treatment or at least meet treatment recommendations. Ms. Hill described Mother's · -, "
- -------···-,.·· - - - - -· - ~I I ~ -- · - " ---

if : 1 I

## --- - ·- - - --4- --- -- - ~ - ---- - ----- -

- ----- - - -- - ----------+---- 33 health , instability, particularly in the areas of housing and employment, and drug use. Those ii was not a resource at the time of the adjudication, due to concerns regarding Mother's mental 'i · !: where Mother left S.K. with a stranger while she took another person's injured dog to receive 

# 'I

' 1· j basis due to a safety concern. Mother was hospitalized pursuant to a 302 hold after an incident rl 1 · 

## , I ! 1 !j : : veterinary care. S.K. was placed in foster care at the time of h i s adjudication because Mother

S.K. was removed from Mother ' s care and initially put in placement on an emergency eighteen months. Both sixteen and eighteen are greater than six. occurred on the petition related to Mother, S.K. had been in placement for approximately which time S.K. was in placement for approximately sixteen months. At the time the hearing d ependent on August 20, 2013; the termination petition was filed December 16 , 2014 , at S.K. has undeniably been in placement in excess of six months. S.K. was adjudicated Section 2511(a)(5) discussion of Section 2511 (b) appears herein. of Mother's parental rights pursuant to Section 2511 (a)(2) is appropriate. A detailed Therefore , based on the credible evidence presented. the Court finds that termination enough stability lo render her capable of independently providing S.K. with the care he needs. Court cannot. from the credible evidence presented, speculate as to when Mother may have not have the stability necessary to alleviate the stressors that exacerbate her disorder and the providing S.K. with the ess e ntial parental care and subsistence that he requires. Mother does ·--- , . ---~ ' I 

# Il l Because of the sheer lack of sustained progress in the past year-and-a-half, the Court cannot determine that Mother can or will remedy the conditions that render h er incapable of,,

- - - - - : ; -- - -------- 34 'i i weekly , but then Ms. Hill described Mother's participation in sessions to be "sporadic." JI intermittently. Ms. H ill stated that in September o r October the sessions were moved to binot remedied many of the concerns that cause her stress and, at a time when she should be her apartment, the car was running well, " Mother was doing well, However, when stress 

# I

f 

## I increased, her symptoms increased and "it kind of went down from there." Mother still has ii 

## ! I Ji H ,, ; [ consistent in attending counseling sessions, she has been communicating with Ms. Hill only H L Hill, during periods of stress. During periods of stabilization, Ms. Hill testified, "when she got

Mother also has difficulty controlling her behavior, particularly, as pointed out by Ms. on a rather regular basis. after the visit was scheduled to begin, but she does see S.K. or speak to him on the telephone she does maintain consistent visitation with S.K. She does occasionally miss a visit, or appear for more than thirty minutes and did not, at that time, explain her absence. To Mother's credit , show progress. During the termination proceeding, she disappeared during a ten-minute recess she consistently indicates that she is working on her time management skills but does not demonstrate those very behaviors. Mother appears late to hearings and to visits. Furthermore, misjudge how much time somethin g will take. Both Ms. Hill and this Court have seen Mother individual with ADHD has "horrendous" time management skills , because they are prone to difficulty processing information and prioritizing tasks. Additionally, Ms. Hill testified that an individuals with severe ADD and ADHD are impulsive, make snap judgments, and have Concerns regarding Mother's mental health continue to exist. Ms. Hill testified that . I 

## ! ! 

## : :

. ... . / t..; concerns have not been alleviated and cannot be re1~1:die~ witl~in a reasonable peri:c;-:f ti~~~:.- · · ·- - · · · -~:j 35



### I 'I , , 2014 until sometime after the 2015 calendar year began that the Agency deemed acceptable; the time of the adjudication, Mother did reside in a hotel room at the Midway Hotel from
/ J August 20, 2013 until December 12 , 2013 that the Agency deemed as suitable for 

# II reunification purposes. Unfortunately, Mother did not remain there long enough to achieve 

## !i ! ! : ' reunification. She has been in-and-out of a number of hotels and friends' homes for most of ij ' I 

### u /i the months S.K. has been in placement. She did obtain an apartment in Dallastown from July : l and whether she could do so within a reasonable amount of time is unclear. Early on, around

At this time, Mother cannot provide S.K. with stable housing suitable for reunification medication for her mental health , she declines to take other medication. Adderall revealed by the test, some tests were negative. Although she was prescribed oth er taking the medication. Although many of her drug tests were positive for the component of Furthermore, assuming she does maintain a valid prescription, she is not consistent with former counsel, Mother has never provided the Agency with a copy of her prescription. Although she asserts she provided a copy of her prescription for Adderall to her and tools in her daily life. the added benefit of Justice Works, because that service assisted Mother in using coping skills ongoing need for services and an ongoing need for counseling. Ms. Hill testified she could see during periods of stress. Furthermore, Mother's chosen counselor believes Mother has an Ji i ; I i ,



# -- ·· - · . .. . - - · -· · I Bec::se :other has not adequately been addressing either her m e utal health concerns or the 

# I

I 

# I other conditions that necessitated placement, safety concerns still exist. Mother continues to 

# I be unable to identify the potential danger caused by her actions when she acts impulsively- - - - -- - - - ----- - ------ ' j 36 :; 4 It is unclear to the Court what lawyer Mother had to pay. Attorney Woodward was court-appointed and paid by the County. know why she is terminated from positions. to provide more than two legal paystubs since S.K. was adjudicated. She has only sought legal
I/ employment that seems physically challenging for her to do, considering the varicose veins i f ii ( 1 and pain she reports in her leg, and therefore unlikely she can maintain. She claims not to 

### I) never worked at any of those jobs for any significant, consistent period of time and she failed throughout York County, and some of those jobs were verified by the caseworker, but she than a few weeks at any of these positions. She reported employment at restaurants of time; most of her employment is in the food service industry and she has not lasted more Mother has been unable 

### to obtain and maintain employment for any extended period that she obtained this housing because it was an "emergency situation." posed, that her - 

# 1111 Street apartment is neither appropriate nor big enough for - and does not intend on staying at this address, as she advised this Court, when no question was receive notice of its address until Mother appeared at the March 12, 2015 hearing. She also Mother's new residence in the city is, in fact: appropriate is unknown, as the Agency did not $1,000.00 to "[her) lawyer,"? and paid her friend $1,000.00 for caring for her dogs. Whether to paying child support, fines, and tow costs, Mother instead paid three payments to a hotel, return Mother received in 2014 could have been used to secure stable housing, but, in addition Dallastown, having moved into York City in January or February of 2015. The sizeable tax the record a number of complaints about its condition. Mother no longer remains in however, Mother was persistent that the apartment was unacceptable and tried to enter into - ~ - --i i ~· -- · ····- · -- - -------- , , , , ! ·- I



### , , 

# ~--~-- ·-·

---------- - ~ - - - -· ---~-- - -· - -- ------------------ ' ! 37 

### ! ! circumstances would change. :[ a Justice Works team was assigned to work with Mother at this point in time that the



### , . instead, preferring to work independently, did not utilize those services in a way that made

1 1 them effective. Mother likes to choose what she works on, when she participates, and what
I , n 

### !I ii that participation looks like. When the Justice Works team terminated services in September Ir i) 2014, after nearly a year of providing assistance , Mother had not made substantial progress 

### i i !! toward achieving many of the goals set forth for her. There is no indication to the Court that if concerns within a reasonable period of time. Mother has been provided with services, but Services or the assistance of the Agency will not assist Mother in remedying these determine Mother's use of drugs is no longer a concern. Mother sees no issue with using illicit drugs to self-medicate. The Court therefore cannot she consumes marijuana to relieve pain, and the presentation of the testimony suggested refused to test for several months until she got the transcripts she wanted. Mother testified that resumed taking the tests in February. There was a significant period of time when Mother were only a few positive tests prior to September 2014 , she tested positively twice since she Drug use, namely Mother's use of marijuana, continues to be an issue. Although there Mother has stable employment or that she has achieved this goal. unknown. Her affidavit does not reveal sufficient information for this Court to conclude that Whether she earns sufficient income from this work and how often she does this work is work, but the only time Mother has provided receipts from payment was in January 2014.

- · -- · - - · · · - --------------------------------------'-- Mother testified that she receives income from performing some form of spiritual , , i · 

# I - I

## -- - - ·· - - -·· --ti-

--- - - - -------------- -

!! i ; :[ 5 At the hearing, Mother stated, "
... becau s e I knew you w ere a person of God and I knew that my son was exactly where he was supposed to be." The "you" Mother was referring to was Ms. B

... i 38 : ; that S.K. is where he was supposed to be. 5 Ms. 

## Ba.II provided credible testimony that S.K.

11 

### is thriving in her care; he has blossomed from being rather timid to an outgoing, intelligent
i/ 

# i i
Jt Additional consideration as to whether termination is in S.K.'s best interest is detailed in 

## ! I I , I' i[ Section 2511 (b ). i ) water and S.K. wearing socks she believed restricted his circulation, Mother in fact admits adjudication of dependency, S.K. 's daily needs have been met by his foster mother. Although While Mother has continued to associate with S.K. consistently throughout S.K.'s The termination of Mother's parental rights best serves S.K. 's needs and welfare . wait for Mother to achieve stability. matter has reached a point where the Court is unable and unwilling to continue to make S.K. a ten-minute recess for more than thirty minutes. She appears tardy to visits with S.K. This any progress: she appeared tardy to all of the termination proceedings and disappeared during asserted that time management is something she is working on, but she has not demonstrated independent and wants to achieve her goals on her own time. Mother has continuously for a sustained period of stability is contrary to his interests, as Mother wants to be It would take Mother several months to achieve and maintain stability. S.K. has 1/ 11 

# 'I already been in care for approximately half of his young life. To continue to make him wait i39 :i consistently indicates that she is working on her time management skills but does not show ;j '1 demonstrate those very behaviors. Mother appears late to hearings and to visits; she 

# ii individuals with severe ADD and ADHD are impulsive, make snap judgments, and have

I/ difficulty processing information and prioritizing tasks. Additionally, Ms. Hill testified that an

,,. / J individual with ADHD has "horrendous" time management skills , because they are prone to

'I i i 

### ! ) misjudge how much time something will take. Both Ms. Hill and this Court have seen Mother

Concerns regarding Mother's mental health continue to exist. Ms. Hill testified that the placement of S.K. continues to be necessary. services provided, all of the concerns that necessitated placement have not been alleviated and may have at times made progress toward some of her goals or has been mostly compliant with instability, particularly in the areas of housing and employment; and drug use. Although she resource at the time of the adjudication, due to concerns regarding Mother's mental health; care. S.K. was placed in foster care at the time of his adjudication because Mother was not a where Mother left S.K. with a stranger while she took an injured dog to receive veterinary basis due to a safety concern. Mother was hospitalized pursuant to a 302 hold after an incident S.K. was removed from Mother's care and initially put in placement on an emergency greater than the twelve-month requirement established in Section 2511 (a)(8). S.K. was in placement for approximately sixteen months. Sixteen months is four months S.K.' s adjudication on August 20 , 2013 until the time the petition on December 16, 2014, Indisputably, S.K. has been in placement in excess of twelve months. From the time of Section 251l(a)(8) . ·- - --- .. , , - --~ii i- , --~--- · ! , i40

taking the medication. Although many of her drug tests were positive for the component of Although she asserts she provided a copy of her prescription fo r Adderall to her 

# I I I " r : former counsel , Mother has never provided the Agency with a copy of her prescription. 

## !l 1 ' ! I Furthermore, assuming she do e s maintain a valid prescription, she is not consistent with

' I counseling. Mother has an ongoing need for services, specifically Justice Works , and an ongoing need for acts impulsively during periods of stress. Furthermore, Mother's chosen counselor believes Mother continues to be unable to identify the potential danger caused by her actions when she concerns or the other conditions that necessitated placement, safety concerns still exist. be "sporadi c ." Because Mother has not adequately been addressing either her mental health weekly, but then Ms. Hill described Mother's participati on in sessions after that alteration to intermittently. Ms. Hill stated that in September or October th e sessions were moved to biconsistent in attending counseling sessions , she has been communicating with Ms. Hill only remedied many of the concerns that cause her stress and, at a time when she should be however, her symptoms increased and "it kind of went down from there." Mother still has not her apartment , the car was running well , " Mother was doing well. When stress increased, Hill, during periods of stress. During periods of stabilization, Ms. Hill testified, "when she g ot Mother also has difficulty controlling her behavior, particularly , as pointed out by Ms. S.K. or speak to him on the telephone on a rather regular basis. occasionalJy miss a visit, or appear after the visit was scheduled to begin, but she do e s see ·-------- - - · - ···· · - - · .. • · ·· · ~ - ~ - ~ - -- - - - ~-~ - ---------------- Mother's credit , she does maintain consistent visitation with S.K. She doe s



### ' i i i/ ! ; i ! -----t' j 

# ----- · -· ~-- · , ! ~ - -- · --· ------· · --·----- I progress. To I ' , , '41

period of time; most of her employment is in the food service industry and she has not lasted Mother has also been unable to obtain and maintain employment for any extended because it was an "emergency situation." apartment is neither appropriate nor big enough for 

# smf and that she obtained this housing address, as she advised this Court, when no question was posed, that her

.... Street Mother appeared at the March 12, 2015 hearing. She also does not intend on staying at this in fact, appropriate is unknown, as the Agency did not receive notice of its address until as she departed that apartment in early 2015. Whether Mother's new residence in the city is, the termination, the Court does note that Mother no longer remains at the Dallastown address, Although the Court is not to consider efforts to remedy the circumstances made after this goal. complaints about its condition. Mother seems to want the Court to believe she did not achieve Dallastown apartment was unacceptable and tried to enter into the record a number of insisted prior to the Status Hearing Order being entered on March 12, 2015, however, that the was deemed appropriate, Mother moved again subsequent to the petition being filed. Mother this apartment appropriate, although there were some "cosmetic" problems. Though the home remained there at the time of the filing of the petition in December 2014. The Agency deemed appropriate for reunification. She did obtain the apartment in Dallastown from July 2014 and At the time of the petition, Mother did have what appeared to be stable housing 

### I 

# I Add~ral.l revealed by the test, some tests. were negative. Altho.ugl~ she was prescribed other

· medication for her mental health , she declmes to take other medication. i

. I; 1]!. 1' 42

Lastly, the termination of Mother's parental rights best serves S.K.'s needs and t r I i 1 · / / with drug testing as directed until February 2015. ·1 " i i

, f I ; j !
, 1 

# ii has stable employment or that she has achieved this goal. 

# ! / Drug use, namely Mother ' s use of marijuana, continues to be an issue. Although there 

### : / 

# I! were only a few positive tests prior to September 2014, Mother then began refusing to
I ' J j participate in the testing until she got the transcripts she wanted. The Court therefore cannot 

# I I I[ determine Mother's use of drugs is no longer a concern, because Mother chose not to comply tj Her "affidavit" does not reveal sufficient information for this Court to conclude that Mother She has not demonstrated, or has not at least been willing to demonstrate, stable employment. self-employed individual, but her declared intent to do something is speculative at this point. unknown. She provided a signed "affidavit" in mid-December declaring her intent to file as a Whether she earns sufficient income from this work and how often she does this work is work," but the only time Mother has provided receipts from payment was in January 2014. Mother testified that she receives income from performing some form of "spiritual maintain. She claims not to know why she is terminated from positions. considering the varicose veins and pain she reports in her leg, and therefore unlikely she can filed. She has only sought legal employment that seems physically challenging for her to do, to provide more than two legal paystubs in the year prior to the termination petition being never worked at any of those jobs for any significant, consistent period of time and she failed 

# . )j I .i :1


# .. - r,~;~,e than a few weeks at any of these posi ti~~:

- ~;,: reported emp

I oyment

# a~ ;e;;::::~:-~-- throughout York County, and some of those jobs were verified by the caseworker, but she43



# ii I· 

## I I 

# 1 · ~ ----- , i 

### j ! 6 At the hearing, Mother stated, " ... because I knew you were a person of God and I knew that my son was 

## !! exactly where he was supposed to be." The " you" Mother was referring to was Ms. 

## 811111. q 7 Any facts as they relate to Mother's attempts to remedy conditions after the filing of th e petition in October : ; 2014 were considered only as this section relates to Section 251 l(a)(2) and (a)(5). In accordance with the dire ctives in Section 25 I I (b), facts related to Mother's efforts after the filing were not considered as this section relates to Section 2511 (a)(8). 

## :j 1 J Mother's own feelings of Jove and affection for S.K. do not prevent termination of her 

# I ! parental rights. See In re Z.P., 994 A.2d 1108, 1121 (Pa.Super. 2010) (internal citations Ji 

### ! ] ] : developmental, physical, and emotional welfare. See generally id. and other witnesses in making the determination whether termination would best suit S.K. 's (Pa.Super, 2011 ). The Court can consider the testimony that was presented by caseworkers consideration under this subsection of the Adoption Act. See In re NA.M. , 33 A.3d 95, 103 Neither expert testimony nor a formal bonding assessment is required for 

### Section 2Sll(b)7 S.K.' s best interest is detailed in Section 2511 (b ). the residence he considers his home. Additional consideration as to whether termination is in rather timid to an outgoing, intelligent little boy. He can give Ms

. 

## .S.- directions back to provided credible testimony that S.K. is thriving in her care; he has blossomed from being have been found. Mother admits that S.K. is where he was supposed to be. 6 Ms. ~ complaints about fluoride and socks, no concerns about S.K. 's safety in Ms. 

## i:a•' care B....- is the individual who makes medical appointments for S.K. and, although Mother adjudication of dependency, S.K. 's daily needs have been met by his foster mother. Ms. welfare. While Mother has continued to associate with S.K. consistently throughout S.K.'s 

# .. - r ,, i·44



### B9Ais th e individual who cares for S.K. on a daily basis and ensures he receives medical Ms. B
.. for nearly half of his life and likely for the entire ty of the life he remembers. Ms. placement with Ms. B

... since he was approximately twenty months old. He has been with termination petition was filed in December 2014 , S.K. was three years old ; he had been in (Pa.Super. 2014)(citing 

### In re K.ZS., 946 A.3d 753, 764 (Pa.Super. 2008)). By the time the and the re sulting bond with the natural parent is attenuated." 

### In re K.HB., 107 A.3d 175 , 180 child and a natural parent where the child has been in foster care for most of the child ' s life,

--------+!---

- ·- - - - ~-- -- -·--------- -- - - ----- -- - ----- --+--- The Superior Court has stated that "no bond worth preserving is formed between a the five-minute mark. the one hang i ng up the phone , it is S.K. that hangs up on Mother when the phone calls near visit ends. He provides Ms. B

.. with the directions back to what he considers to be his sometim e s reluctant to attend visits with Mother and is always ready to head home when th e typically fine during the visit and interacts with Mother when she is present, S.K. is Additionally, the credible evidence presented to the Court indicates that , although he is Rather, according to Mother, S.K. is always testing boundaries when he's with her. finds 

### it difficult to consider the love, comfort, security, and closeness S.K. feels to Mother. credible evidence presented regarding Mother's interactions with S.K. The Court therefore Because the Court did not find Mother to be a credible witness , there was not significant supported such a finding, does not preclude termination. See 

### In re NA.1\1. , 33 A.3d at 103. i i 1',----- ··- -·· - - · · · · - -·- .. - . · · - · - - - - ·-· · · · -- - - - - - - - - - - ·- · - -- - - - 

# I omitted). Moreover, the mere existence of a bond, if the Court did find credible evidence45 The Agency has established by clear and convincing evidence that S.K. was removed 

### CS.§ 251 J(a)(2). of the incapacity, neglect and refusal cannot or will not be remedied by Mother. 

### 23 Pa. subsistence necessary for his physical or mental well-being and the conditions and causes 

# I I I 

# I I [ ) il J ; ! i
:i t r 

### 3.

_ , H ii i i u ii and refusal of Mother has caused S.K. to be without essential parental care, control or 2. The Agency has established by clear and convincing evidence that the incapacity, neglect petition. 

### 23 Pa. CS.§ 2511 (a)(l). perform parental duties on behalf of S.K. for at least six months p rior to the filing of the either demonstrated a settled purpose to relinquish her parental rights or has failed to I
. The Agency has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that Mother has CONCLUSIONS OF LAW petition filed by the Agency. rights pursuant to both Section 25 I 1 (a) and Section 25 I 1 (b ), the Court does GRANT the As the Court has found credible evidence exists to support termination of Mother ' s opportunity he is not afforded by his mother. Ms. B- facilitates ongoing contact between S.K. and his maternal grandmother , a variations of "Mommy," but sometimes refers to Mother as just 

## "AMS?Mt" Furthermore, not demonstrated she has the ability to offer him. He refers to Ms. B 

### •21 always with longer the case. Ms. B

.. has provided S.K. with the safe, stable environment Mother has When S.K. first came into Ms. 

# Ell f care, he was easily frightened by visitors; this is no i

--- i-- 1 

## i i' ii i 

## Ii 

# ~r~ ---------- -------46



# ~· ( 

# ~W(Qe(k ANDREA MARCECA STRC Dated: 

# s(~[lS 23 Pa. CS.§ 251J(a)(5); 23 Pa. CS§ 2511(a)(8); 23 Pa. 

### C.S. § 2511(/_ 5. Termination of Mother's parental rights will be s t serve S.K. 's 

### ne 23 Pa. 

### C.S. § 2511 (a)(8). Furthermore, the termination o f p arental rig hts is in S.K. petition and that the circumstances that necessitate d plac e ment c from Mother ' s custody more than twelve months prior to the filing 4. The Agency has established by cl e ar and convincing evidence that : S.K. ' s best interest. 23 Pa. CS.§ 2511(a)(5). withi n a reasonabl e period of time. Furthermore, the termination of p the services or assistance available to Mother are not likely to rem Mother cannot or will not remedy these conditions within a reasonable placement. The circumstances which led to S .K. ' s placement con from the care of Mother for a p eriod in excess of six (6) months and ha ---~ - - -·-·-- !

·1 I · :r

. . .. .. · · - . · ----- 1 -- - -· · ---- - - - - ... 

# I