Opinion ID: 612544
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Squalor and Chaos of the Foust Home

Text: In 1980, when Foust was nearly three years old, he and his siblings were removed from their home because of their mother's arrest. Cuyahoga County Welfare Department records describe the condition of the home on the day that the children entered state custody: the home had a strong stench from feces (human and animal) which was all around, smeared on walls and clothing in piles on the floor. There were garbage bags full all around and flies. App'x Vol. 3 at 1039. On another day, [t]he stench was strong, as the door was open a small amount. Id. at 1040. Finding clean clothes for the children was a difficult task because the rooms were in complete disorder. Id. at 1039. The children stated they had not been fed the night before or that day. Id. The baby[, Amy,] had a severe diaper rash and loose bowels. Jeremy and Kelly were in diapers which were dirty. Id. The notes also describe the children as basically dirty and dirty and dissheveled [sic]. Id. at 1039-40. Their clothes were in poor repair and dirty. Id. at 1040. Another record from 1980 reports that there was vomit on the floor in their apartment. Id. at 1123. These miserable conditions persisted throughout Foust's childhood. In 1985, when Foust was eight, a social worker visited the Foust home. Although the social worker knew from the Fousts' social-services record that their homekeeping standards were submarginal, the social worker was shocked at the total deprivation and pre[]ponderance of filth, indicating the absence of any standard of housekeeping. The home ... was a lice infested, canine feces factory with no hot water and little food for 9 children and one adult. Id. at 1033. The social worker immediately turned to the Homemaking Department of the Department of Human Services for cleaning services. Id. After one visit, however, the Homemaking Department determined that it could no longer provide service, as requested, in the future. The home has 2 cats, 2 dogs, mice and fleas jumping everywhere. There are animal feces also everywhere. The children appear to have lice and are scratching due to the infestation of fleas. There is also very little food in the home [and no] hot water. The children are dirty and in need of baths. This case is being denied ongoing service due to uninhabitable living conditions.... [W]e feel that these children being left in this home continue to be at risk. Id. at 1036. Another worker called the home a pig sty. Id. The siblings' affidavits support this dire depiction. Amy described their home as filthy, with cockroaches and mice everywhere. No one did dishes, and there was always a pile of dirty dishes. Id. at 1206 (Amy Aff. ¶ 2). The home did not have gas or hot water when a social worker visited in 1985, id. at 1033, and Amy said that gas and electricity were routinely turned off, id. at 1206 (Amy Aff. ¶ 2). Foust's parents also neglected to perform other household duties. Foust's mother never cooked for us kids. If you were hungry, you had to make something for yourself or you would starve. Id. at 1206-07 (Amy Aff. ¶ 2). Amy also said that Barbara never did the laundry: When all the clothes were dirty, [Barbara] would go to Goodwill and get a couple bags of clothes. When those clothes got dirty, she would go back to Goodwill and get more bags of clothes. There were piles of clothes in the basement. Once, when I was ten years old, I went to the basement to do some laundry but couldn't because fleas were in the clothes and they bit me all over my legs. Id. at 1207 (Amy Aff. ¶ 3). The children were not required to take baths and could go for a month without a bath, if [they] wanted to. Id. Passing references at the mitigation hearing to minor maladies in no way conveyed the abysmal condition of Foust's childhood home. Gary testified that the home wasn't well kept. App'x Vol. 7 at 2586 (Gary Test.). Karpawich's mitigation evaluation said merely that Foust's mother did not clean the home and ... the children suffered from head lice, App'x Vol. 5 at 2076 (Karpawich Report), and his oral testimony never broached the subject. Because the facts adduced at the mitigation hearing on this point were neither numerous nor detailed, we conclude that the new evidence is substantially different and not cumulative.