An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute 

controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance 

with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA13-1452

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed: 3 June 2014

IN THE MATTER OF:

W.L.S. Chatham County

No. 12-JT-35

Appeal by respondent-mother from order entered 1 October 

2013 by Judge Beverly Scarlett in Chatham County District Court. 

Heard in the Court of Appeals 28 April 2014.

Holcomb & Cabe, L.L.P., by Carol J. Holcomb and Samantha H. 

Cabe, for petitioner-appellee Chatham County Department of 

Social Services.

Everett Gaskins Hancock LLP, by James M. Hash, for Guardian 

ad Litem.

Windy H. Rose for respondent-appellant mother.

McCULLOUGH, Judge.

Respondent-mother (“respondent”) appeals from an order 

terminating her parental rights to her son W.L.S. (“Will”)1. 

 

1The pseudonym “Will” is used throughout this opinion to protect 

the identity of the child and for ease of reading.
-2-

Respondent challenges the grounds for termination found by the 

trial court. We affirm.

I. Background

On 12 July 2012, the Chatham County Department of Social 

Services (“DSS”) filed a petition alleging that Will was a 

neglected and dependent juvenile. DSS alleged that Will and 

respondent tested positive for cocaine after his birth. DSS 

obtained nonsecure custody that day.

In an order filed 21 September 2012, the trial court 

adjudicated Will dependent and continued custody of Will with 

DSS. DSS filed a motion to terminate respondent’s parental 

rights on 8 March 2013. The trial court conducted a hearing 

upon the motion on 11 July 2013. By order filed 1 October 2013, 

the court terminated respondent’s parental rights pursuant to 

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1) (neglect) (2013); N.C. Gen. 

Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(6) (2013) (incapability of providing for the 

proper care and supervision of child); and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B1111(a)(9) (2013) (parental rights to another child have been 

involuntarily terminated and the parent lacks the ability or 

willingness to establish a safe home). Respondent appeals.

II. Discussion
-3-

When we review a termination of parental rights case, we 

consider whether the findings of fact are “supported by clear, 

cogent and convincing evidence and whether these findings, in 

turn, support the conclusions of law. We then consider, based 

on the grounds found for termination, whether the trial court 

abused its discretion in finding termination to be in the best 

interest of the child.” In re Shepard, 162 N.C. App. 215, 221-

22, 591 S.E.2d 1, 6 (citation and internal quotation marks 

omitted), disc. review denied sub nom. In re D.S., 358 N.C. 

543, 599 S.E.2d 42 (2004). Unchallenged findings of fact are 

binding on appeal. See In re Humphrey, 156 N.C. App. 533, 540, 

577 S.E.2d 421, 426 (2003) (“Findings of fact to which a 

respondent did not object are conclusive on appeal.”).

Preliminarily we note that although the trial court 

concluded grounds existed pursuant to sections 7B-1111(a)(1), 

(6), and (9) of the North Carolina General Statutes to terminate 

respondent’s parental rights, we find it dispositive that the 

evidence is sufficient to support termination of respondent’s 

rights under section 7B-1111(a)(9). See In re Pierce, 67 N.C. 

App. 257, 261, 312 S.E.2d 900, 903 (1984) (a finding of one 

statutory ground is sufficient to support the termination of 

parental rights).
-4-

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(9) provides that a trial court 

may terminate parental rights upon finding that “[t]he parental 

rights of the parent with respect to another child of the parent 

have been terminated involuntarily by a court of competent 

jurisdiction and the parent lacks the ability or willingness to 

establish a safe home.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(9). 

Termination under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(9) “necessitates 

findings regarding two separate elements: (1) involuntary 

termination of parental rights as to another child, and (2) 

inability or unwillingness to establish a safe home.” In re 

L.A.B., 178 N.C. App. 295, 299, 631 S.E.2d 61, 64 (2006). A 

safe home is “[a] home in which the juvenile is not at 

substantial risk of physical or emotional abuse or neglect.” 

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-101(19) (2013).

Respondent does not dispute that she had her parental 

rights involuntarily terminated with respect to another child by 

a court of competent jurisdiction. Rather, respondent 

challenges the court’s conclusion that she was unable to provide 

a safe home. Respondent argues that she “has the ability to 

provide appropriate care” because she took “the necessary steps 

to address her history of substance abuse and mental health 

issues.”
-5-

The trial court made the following unchallenged findings of 

fact relevant to respondent’s ability or willingness to

establish a safe home:

19. Respondent mother completed a 

diagnostic assessment with Carolina 

Behavioral Health (CBH) on August 1, 

2012. Among the findings of the 

assessment were that Respondent mother 

appeared neat and clean and age 

appropriate in appearance; Respondent 

mother was hyper at times during the 

interview process; Respondent mother 

exhibited anti-social behavior; 

Respondent mother is a chronic liar; 

Respondent mother has impaired judgment 

and impaired memory; Respondent mother 

lacks impulse control; Respondent 

mother has a substance addiction; and 

Respondent mother has a sleep disorder.

20. The August, 2012 CBH assessment 

recommends individual substance abuse 

therapy, among other things.

21. During the pendency of this case, 

Respondent mother has undergone multiple 

drug screens. The results of her drug 

screens as known by the Social Worker 

are:

a. August 17, 2012. No show for 

requested drug screen

b. August 20, 2012. Positive for cocaine 

(over 3,000 ng)

c. August 27, 2012. Positive for cocaine 

(15,929 ng)

d. September 26, 2012. No response to 

request from Social Worker

e. September 28, 2012. No show for 

visitation, so no request made

f. October 2, 2012. No show for 
-6-

requested drug screen

g. October 3, 2012. No show for 

requested drug screen

h. November 15, 2012. Positive for 

cocaine (1,425 ng)

i. November 19, 2012. Admitted to ADATC.

Positive for cocaine (over 100,000 

ngs) and amphetamines (2,000 ngs)[.]

j. January 11, 2013. Negative

k. January 23, 2013. Hair follicle 

positive for cocaine (38.6)

l. March 15, 2013. Negative

m. May 9, 2013. Negative hair follicle

22. Respondent mother currently resides at a 

half-way house in Wilmington, NC.

According to the half-way house manager, 

for about eight (8) months Respondent has 

tested negative for substances. 

Respondent mother is just beginning to 

address her long-standing substance 

abuse/addiction.

23. Since January, 2013, Respondent mother 

has had four (4) mental health 

appointments at Coastal Horizons. This 

is not sufficient evidence that 

Respondent mother has addressed her 

severe mental illness.

24. Respondent mother does not have a home or 

employment such that she can provide for 

[Will].

25. Respondent mother has a long-standing 

history of drug addiction and untreated 

mental illness.

26. Respondent mother intends to remain in 

the half-way house for up to a year or 

more. She can stay there as long as she 

wants or needs to.

27. Respondent mother offered copies of sign
-7-

out sheets where she signed out at the 

half-way house in order to attend AA/NA 

meetings. It appears that she does 

attend daily meetings.

We hold that the findings regarding respondent’s lack of 

mental health treatment, her intention to remain at the half-way 

house, and her lack of employment, support the trial court’s 

conclusion that respondent lacked the ability to establish a 

home where Will is not at substantial risk of physical or 

emotional abuse or neglect. Thus, the trial court did not err 

in concluding that grounds exist to terminate respondent’s

parental rights pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(9). 

Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s order terminating 

respondent’s parental rights.

Affirmed.

Judges HUNTER, Robert C., and GEER concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).