J -S32002-19 

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 

IN THE INTEREST OF: K.B., : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 

A MINOR PENNSYLVANIA 

APPEAL OF: J.H., MOTHER 

: No. 198 EDA 2019 

Appeal from the Order Entered December 13, 2018 

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Family Court at 

No(s): CP-51-DP-0002515-2018 

IN THE INTEREST OF: Z.B., : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 

A MINOR PENNSYLVANIA 

APPEAL OF: J.H., MOTHER 

: No. 199 EDA 2019 

Appeal from the Order Entered December 13, 2018 

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Family Court at 

No(s): CP-51-DP-0002516-2018 

BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., NICHOLS, J., and MURRAY, J. 

MEMORANDUM BY SHOGAN, J.: FILED JULY 30, 2019 

J.H. ("Mother") appeals from the orders entered on December 13, 2018 

that adjudicated her children, K.B., born in November of 2013, and Z.B., born 
J -S32002-19 

in December of 2014, (collectively "the Children"), dependent.' After careful 

review, we affirm the trial court's orders. 

The trial court set forth the relevant facts and procedural history of this 

case as follows: 

On November 13, 2018, the Philadelphia Department of 

Human Services ("DHS") received a General Protective Services 

("GPS") report which alleged that [Mother and Father] used PCP[2] 

and K2.[3] The GPS report alleged that [Mother and Father] were 

under the influence of controlled substances while in the presence 

of the Children and that [Mother and Father] left the Children 

unattended daily while they purchased controlled substances. 

Father was convicted for drug related offenses [on] 

September 10, 2007, January 19, 2010 and December 20, 2010. 

The GPS report also alleged that Mother had a history of mental 

illness and that she was institutionalized because she believed that 

someone was trying to kill her. On November 14, 2018, DHS 

interviewed Father who admitted to DHS personnel that he used 

PCP. An Order for Protective Custody was obtained by DHS on 

December 13, 201[8]. On December 13, 2018, the [trial court] 

held a hearing to determine if [the Children] should be adjudicated 

dependent. [Mother and Father] were present at the hearing and 

represented by counsel. After the hearing, the [trial court] found 

clear and convincing evidence to adjudicate the Children 

dependent. 

1- The Children's father, C.B. ("Father"), filed appeals from the trial court's 

orders at Superior Court docket numbers 205 EDA 2019 and 206 EDA 2019. 

Father's appeals are addressed in a separate memorandum. 

2 Phencyclidine ("PCP") is a schedule II controlled substance. 35 P.S. § 780- 

104(2)(v)(1); 28 Pa.Code § 25.72(c)(5)(i). 

3 K2 is a synthetic cannabinoid. Synthetic cannabinoids are schedule I 

controlled substances. 35 P.S. § 780-104(1)(vii). 

-2 
J -S32002-19 

Trial Court Opinion, 3/22/19, at unnumbered 2-3. Mother timely appealed the 

trial court's orders on January 12, 2019, in separate notices of appeal. Both 

the trial court and Mother complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925. 

On appeal, Mother presents the following issue for this Court's 

consideration: 

A. Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it 

adjudicated the [C]hildren dependent and committed them to 

DHS where such determination was not supported by clear and 

convincing evidence pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6302? 

Mother's Brief at 4 (full capitalization omitted). 

Our Supreme Court set forth our standard of review for dependency 

cases as follows: 

[T]he standard of review in dependency cases requires an 

appellate court to accept the findings of fact and credibility 

determinations of the trial court if they are supported by the 

record, but does not require the appellate court to accept the 

lower court's inferences or conclusions of law. Accordingly, we 

review for an abuse of discretion. 

In re R.J.T., 9 A.3d 1179, 1190 (Pa. 2010). Regarding the definition of an 

abuse of discretion, this Court has stated the following: 

An abuse of discretion is not merely an error of judgment; if, in 

reaching a conclusion, the court overrides or misapplies the law, 

or the judgment exercised is shown by the record to be either 

manifestly unreasonable or the product of partiality, prejudice, 

bias or ill will, discretion has been abused. 

Bulgarelli v. Bulgarelli, 934 A.2d 107, 111 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citation and 

quotation marks omitted). 

-3 
J -S32002-19 

Additionally, "[t]he burden of proof in a dependency proceeding is on 

the petitioner to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that a child 

meets that statutory definition of dependency." In re G.,T., 845 A.2d 870, 

872 (Pa. Super. 2004). Section 6302 of the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301- 

6375, defines a "dependent child" as a child who: 

(1) is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, 

education as required by law, or other care or control necessary 

for his physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals. A 

determination that there is a lack of proper parental care or 

control may be based upon evidence of conduct by the parent, 

guardian or other custodian that places the health, safety or 

welfare of the child at risk, including evidence of the parent's, 

guardian's or other custodian's use of alcohol or a controlled 

substance that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at 

risk[.] 

42 Pa.C.S. § 6302. "The question of whether a child is lacking proper parental 

care or control so as to be a dependent child encompasses two discrete 

questions: whether the child presently is without proper parental care and 

control, and if so, whether such care and control are immediately available." 

G.T., 845 A.2d at 872 (citation omitted). 

The trial court concluded that the Children were dependent due to 

Mother's drug use and mental instability. Specifically, the trial court found as 

follows: 

During the hearing on December 13, 2018, the DHS 

Representative testified that Father confirmed Mother had 

received inpatient mental health treatment and that Mother tested 

positive on her admittance for PCP. (N.T. December 13, 2018 Page 

7). DHS also introduced evidence that Mother and Father had 

tested positive for PCP on November 19, 2018. (N.T. 

December 13, 2018 Page 7). The trial court accorded great 

-4 
J -S32002-19 

weight to the testimony of the DHS Representative and the 

evidence that Mother was mentally unstable and Mother and 

Father were users of PCP. This evidence provided clear and 

convincing evidence that Mother and Father lacked the ability to 

provide safety and adequate parental control for their Children 

and that separation of the Parents and Children was necessary for 

the welfare of the Children. 

Trial Court Opinion, 3/22/19, at unnumbered 4-5. 

At the December 13, 2018 hearing, Mother challenged the 

aforementioned mental -health commitment and alleged that she had been 

kidnapped. Id. at 9. Mother also averred that she had never used PCP and 

any report to the contrary was a lie. Id. at 10. However, the record reflects 

that Mother was involuntarily committed for a psychiatric evaluation pursuant 

to 50 P.S. § 7302, and she tested positive for PCP. N.T., 12/13/18, at 7. 

Moreover, the record reveals that Mother requires assistance caring for the 

Children as both of the Children have special needs. Applications for 

Emergency Protective Custody, 11/6/18.4 

The record contains clear and convincing evidence that the Children 

lacked proper parental care and control, and Mother was unable to provide 

such care. After review, we discern no abuse of discretion in the trial court's 

conclusion that Mother's mental health issues and use of PCP placed the 

health, safety, and welfare of the Children at risk pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. 

4 The November 6, 2018 Applications for Emergency Protective Custody were 

filed concerning both Mother and Father and in regard to each of the Children. 

- 5 - 
J -S32002-19 

§ 6302. Accordingly, we affirm the orders adjudicating the Children 

dependent. 

Orders affirmed. 

Judgment Entered. 

J seph D. Seletyn, 

Prothonotary 

Date: 7/30/19 

-6