Opinion ID: 1886607
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Family Court Properly Applied the Bests Interests Factors.

Text: Finally, Tara claims that the Family Court abused its discretion in weighing the statutory best interests factors. The final issue thus becomes whether the Family Court abused its discretion in weighing the best interests factors. We conclude that it did not. It is well-established that the Family Court may assign different weights to the various best interests factors, and that in some cases one factor may counterbalance or even outweigh the rest. [17] In its termination order, the Family Court specifically emphasized the third factor (the interaction and interrelationship of the child with his or her parents or persons who may significantly affect the child's best interests), as follows: Factor three is particularly significant. Due to mother's arrest and incarceration, there is no longer a relationship between mother and the child, nor is there a relationship between [Trevor Jr.] and mother's family. There is a close relationship between the child and father's family, who have assumed the obligation of raising the child. The [c]ourt's findings with respect to this factor support the [c]ourt's determination to terminate mother's parental rights. Singling out the third factor as particularly significant indicates that the court gave it significant weight. Another factor (the second) was found to be neutral, and the remaining factors weighed in favor of termination. To establish that the Family Court abused its discretion, Tara must show that the Family Court's findings were not supported by the record or were not the product of a logical and orderly reasoning process. She has made no such showing. All she does is assert that: It is undisputed that Child has good interactions with Mother and that Mother has continually, through her incarceration, attempted to improve that bond through contact with the Division workers as well as the Read Aloud programs where she would read books on tape and then send them, with a tape recorder and the books to the Division in the hopes that the Division worker would play the tapes for Child. That assertion, even if credited, is insufficient. Tara's good interactions with her son during his limited visitation does not diminish the force of the Family Court's finding that Trevor Jr. had developed a close relationship with the Vincents, but had essentially no relationship with his mother. The Family Court's heavy weighting of the third best interest factor is supported by its finding that: [Trevor Jr.] has been in the care of the State of Delaware, and out of the care of his mother, since he was seven months old. Seventeen months of his two years have been spent in foster care. [Trevor Jr.] should not have to wait at least another year, and in all likelihood significantly longer, to achieve permanency and stability in his life. Whatever progress Tara may be able to make in working on her reunification case plan while in prisonor after her releasewas properly found to fall short of the full-time parenting that any child, especially a very young child, requires. The evidence clearly supports the Family Court's finding that there was no longer a significant relationship between Tara and her son, and that Trevor Jr. had formed a close relationship with the Vincents. That finding, perhaps alone but certainly combined with the rest, provides an amply sufficient basis for terminating Tara's parental rights.