J-S48016-14

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

IN RE: ADOPTION OF: A.M., A MINOR : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

:

:

:

APPEAL OF: D.M., MOTHER : No. 639 MDA 2014

Appeal from the Decree entered February 26, 2014,

Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County,

Orphans’ Court at No. 48 of 2013

IN RE: I.R., A MINOR : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

:

:

:

APPEAL OF: D.M., MOTHER : No. 640 MDA 2014

Appeal from the Decree entered February 26, 2014,

Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County,

Orphans’ Court at No. 47-2013

IN RE: ADOPTION OF: A.R. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

:

:

:

APPEAL OF: D.M., MOTHER : No. 641 MDA 2014

Appeal from the Decree entered February 26, 2014,

Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County,

Orphans’ Court at No. 46-2013

IN RE: ADOPTION OF: E.R., A MINOR : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

: PENNSYLVANIA

:

:

:

APPEAL OF: D.M., MOTHER : No. 642 MDA 2014

Appeal from the Decree entered February 26, 2014,

Court of Common Pleas, Northumberland County,

Orphans’ Court at No. 45-2013

BEFORE: DONOHUE, JENKINS and PLATT*, JJ.
J-S48016-14

- 2 -

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY DONOHUE, J.: FILED JANUARY 23, 2015

I agree with my esteemed colleagues that competent evidence 

supports the trial court’s decision to terminate Mother’s parental rights to 

the Children. See Maj. at 5-6.1 I disagree, however, with the Majority’s 

statement that the record reveals “no evidence [that] a bond exists between 

Mother and the Children.” Id. at 6. To the contrary, testimony presented at 

the February 21, 2014 hearing regarding Mother’s parental rights to the 

Children suggests that the Children and Mother do share a bond. Paternal 

Grandmother and Grandfather both testified that the Children would be sad 

if her parental rights were terminated. N.T., 2/21/14 (Mother), at 47, 53, 

63-64. They also testified that the Children are happy when Mother visits 

and look forward to seeing her. Id. at 53, 62. 

The fact that there is evidence of a bond between Mother and the 

Children, however, does not prohibit the trial court from terminating her 

parental rights. In re A.D., 93 A.3d 888, 897 (Pa. Super. 2014). “Rather, 

the trial court must examine the status of the bond to determine whether its 

termination would destroy an existing, necessary and beneficial 

relationship.” Id. at 898 (quotation and citation omitted). 

 

1

 For purposes of completeness, I note that the trial court did not terminate 

Mother’s parental rights to the Children solely pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 

2511(a)(1) and (b), but also found that CYS satisfied its burden of proving 

grounds for termination under subsections (a)(2), (5), and (8). See Final 

Decree, 2/27/14, ¶¶ 2-4.
J-S48016-14

- 3 -

The record contains ample testimony to support a finding that 

terminating Mother’s parental rights to the Children would not destroy a 

necessary and beneficial relationship. Mother admitted during her testimony 

that she had not seen the Children as frequently as she could have during 

the three years they were in CYS care. Of the at least seventy visits she 

could have had, she took advantage of only fourteen. N.T., 2/21/14, at 88. 

Nine of the visits arranged through CYS lasted an hour; the remaining visits 

arranged with Paternal Grandmother were between three and six hours 

each. Id. at 89-90. Thus, Mother spent approximately thirty-six hours with 

the Children during the thirty-six months they were out of her care. 

Furthermore, although the Children enjoyed and looked forward to visiting 

with their Mother, they were reportedly unfazed when the visits ended. Id.

at 62.

Paternal Grandfather testified that he has spoken with the Children 

about the possibility of Mother’s rights being terminated and indicated that 

the Children were, in part, relieved to learn that Mother would not be 

involved in the future. Id. at 63-64. According to Paternal Grandmother, 

Children have, over time, accepted the fact that Mother was not going to be 

returning and do not ask to live with her. Id. at 54-55. Paternal 

Grandmother testified that terminating Mother’s parental rights would not 

harm them and that “they will be able to move forward.” Id. at 47.
J-S48016-14

- 4 -

The record supports the trial court’s decision to terminate Mother’s 

parental rights. I therefore concur in the result reached by the learned 

Majority.