Opinion ID: 2126789
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: compliance with case plan

Text: Xavier was weaned from the feeding tube to the bottle, and his special needs largely resolved. However, his adjudication began a process in which a case plan for reunification was developed by the Department for Katianne. According to the Department, Katianne was not to be reunited with Xavier until the goals of that plan were met. The goals of the case plan included maintaining steady employment, attending therapy, submitting to random urinalysis testing, attending parenting classes, presenting a budget and receipts for the timely payment of her bills, enhancing her time management skills, maintaining a healthy lifestyle, maintaining her home in a condition suitable for visits, engaging in positive family activities, maintaining communication with service providers, and cooperating with a family support worker to set up visitation with Xavier. The initial visitation plan under the voluntary placement had been four 2-hour visits per week. As of September 9, 2004, when the Department asked Katianne and Xavier's father to sign a voluntary extension of that agreement, Katianne had not seen Xavier for 3 weeks. She had canceled her visits with Xavier for various reasons, including illnesses of her other children, and also, presumably, for reasons relating to her August 23 hospitalization. By November, after the adjudication, visitation was reduced to twice a week. Because of further missed visits, the frequency and number of which are not reflected in the record, Katianne's visits were reduced to once a week in January 2005. The only visitation records submitted into evidence by the Department show that between June 1 and December 2, 2005, 48 out of 59 scheduled visits between Katianne and Xavier took place. Each visit lasted approximately 2 hours. Approximately 10 visits were missed, although several canceled visits were due to family members' being ill. In accordance with the case plan, Katianne immediately began working with Lutheran Family Services to address substance abuse and mental health issues. After an initial evaluation, Lutheran Family Services recommended a 12-week individual and group outpatient therapy program for substance abuse. Katianne had successfully completed the program by the end of December 2004. Katianne also saw a psychiatrist at Lutheran Family Services, who prescribed antidepressants. Ongoing therapy to address general mental health issues was recommended in conjunction with her medication. Debra Hallstrom was Katianne's therapist through Lutheran Family Services. Hallstrom testified that Katianne was fairly regular in her appointments with her. Still, by the end of December 2004, Katianne had three late cancels with the supervising psychiatrist who prescribed her antidepressants. In accordance with Lutheran Family Services' official policy, the three late cancels mandated that Katianne be discharged for all services provided by the program, including her therapy visits with Hallstrom. During her discharge, Katianne sought therapy outside of Lutheran Family Services. In April 2005, Katianne was allowed back into the program at Lutheran Family Services. Katianne continued her therapy at Lutheran Family Services until October or November 2005, when she was again discharged for three late cancels with her supervising physician. Hallstrom testified that at the time of her discharge, Katianne had partially completed her therapy goals, such as boundary issues and setting goals. Katianne was still working on issues relating to job stability, daycare, and her dependence on Social Security income. Katianne did not have the money to pay for daycare, and she could not rely on Xavier's father to take care of the children. Hallstrom explained that Katianne was not able to get to work when a child was sick, and because of unreliable childcare, this was causing problems with her employment. Although Katianne missed visits to her supervising physician, she did continue taking her antidepressant medication. Katianne also worked with Raegen Yount, a family support worker, to try to reach the goals of her case plan. Yount instructed Katianne in a parenting course called nurturing parenting. Katianne successfully completed the course in approximately 11 months. Yount described that 11 months was on the high end for completion of the course, but that Katianne was generally engaged and was good about completing her homework for the course. Yount testified that she had less success in teaching Katianne to properly budget her finances. According to Yount, budgeting was just something Katianne was not able to grasp. Yount opined that Katianne and Xavier's father were spending money on unnecessary items they could not afford. She pointed out that they rented-to-own a dishwasher, washer and dryer, bunk beds for the girls, and a fancy stereo, which stereo was apparently later returned at Yount's urging. Yount testified that Katianne paid her bills late and that family members had often been called upon to help Katianne with her rent or utility bills. Yount also noted the fact that a used van Katianne bought had been repossessed. While Katianne had not owned another vehicle, Yount considered this purchase unnecessary. Yount supervised Katianne's visits with Xavier. She stated her general observation that Katianne's house was not organized. The master bedroom door would often be closed because of the disarray inside. There was clothing that had been thrown down the steps of the unfinished basement where the laundry room was located. The girls had colored on the walls of their bedroom. Yount testified that some of Katianne's visits with Xavier went very well, and some went very badly. Yount testified that the recent second-year birthday party for Xavier at Katianne's home was very, very nice. There was cake and pizza; they sang Happy Birthday; and there wasn't a whole lot of chaos, a whole lot of screaming going on or anything. Yount explained that, in contrast, in the last few months, there had been other times where the environment had been more noisy because of the girls' behavior and Katianne's trying to discipline them. Yount recounted an incident during a May 4, 2006. visit, when Katianne tried to discipline Kalila for refusing to put her clothes back on after Kalila had stripped and decided she wanted to take a bath. Yount stated that Katianne had redirected Kalila many times to the timeout chair, but, when describing Katianne's discipline skills, Yount stated: And that has always been a thing with Kati[anne] and [Xavier's father] is that they will say go to time out, but whether the time out is utilized at all, or even utilized correctly, is a challenge for them. They'll get parts of a time out right, but other parts they won't. . . . It was time after time. And I directed [Katianne] to just take [Kalila] to the room. And Kalila was just left there. No direction as to why she was going to her room and no direction as to why she should get out of her room. Yount also testified as to an incident when Katianne was changing Xavier's diaper and Alita and Kalila were in his face and Kalila said something about Xavier's genital area. This, according to Yount, upset Xavier. Yount testified that the girls' crowding Xavier during diaper changes was a recurring problem. She did note, however, that during the last visit, Katianne did prompt the girls to back up. . . without any guidance or anything. But she noted that, unfortunately, the girls did not back up and that Katianne simply finished changing Xavier without disciplining the girls. Yount stated that on most visits, Katianne was attentive to Xavier and the girls. At times, Katianne would have had a bad day and would want to talk. On such occasions, Yount stated that Katianne would be sitting on the floor and would observe the children while she talked about herself. Yount testified that other than going to the park, Katianne did not plan structured activities such as doing a craft project or going to the library. Yount indicated that Katianne had kept in good contact with Xavier's physician to discuss his health, when that was an issue. Yount noted that Katianne had missed visits with Xavier for various reasons. Sometimes the other children were sick. Sometimes Katianne had to work early. Yount explained that she and Katianne's case manager had refused Katianne's request on one occasion to have an extended visit with Xavier at an Omaha zoo when the Head Start program was offering free admission for the children. Yount explained that Katianne had given her only 1 day's notice of the request. Moreover, gas to drive to the zoo would cost money, Katianne still had to pay admission for herself, and Katianne had mentioned renting a stroller. Yount stated, I had the concern about money because prior to that I know relatives had helped her pay bills. And so, I had a question as to why are we making these type [sic] of judgments. The girls eventually went to the zoo with someone else, and Katianne stayed home in order to be able to visit with Xavier. Ann Paulson, a court-appointed special advocate, likewise observed many of Xavier's visits in Katianne's home. Paulson testified that Xavier would generally interact with his two sisters while at Katianne's home, play with toys, and have a snack. Paulson described Kalila's temper tantrum during the May 4, 2006, visit that Yount had mentioned. Paulson explained that 3-year-old Kalila threw a tantrum when Katianne tried to keep Kalila from taking off all her clothes and her pull-up. Paulson stated that Katianne repeatedly placed Kalila in a time-out chair when Kalila left the chair without Katianne's permission. Katianne did get Kalila's dress back on, but not the pull-up. Still, Paulson explained, it went on for quite a lengthy time, and [Katianne] got very frustrated with the situation and kinda [sic] just gave up on not knowing what to do and how to handle her. Yount eventually called Kalila over to her, put on her pull-up, and advised Katianne to put Kalila in her room, which she did. Paulson noted that there was a flea infestation of Katianne's home in the fall of 2005. She also noted that on one visit in January 2006, she had not received a late message that Katianne was canceling visitation. Upon arrival to Katianne's home, Paulson could clearly see inside the house that it was in complete turmoil, and there were clothes, boxes, and toys, and all kinds of possessions of all sorts laying all over the home. On three visits, she found that the girls' beds did not have any bedding on them, although she could not say whether that was because the bedding was being washed. With these exceptions, Paulson described Katianne's home as generally clean and ready for them to visit. Michelle Barnett, the caseworker for the Department who prepared Katianne's case plan, testified that it was her opinion that Katianne had generally not followed through with the plan the Department had set for her. Barnett testified that Katianne had been very good in the area of remaining drug free. Nor had she had any problem taking her psychotropic medication in quite some time. Barnett believed that Katianne had, with the exception of the flea incident, maintained the conditions of her home up to the Department's standards, and she did not find any reports that the home was supposedly in disarray to be of any concern. Katianne had remained in the same residence with her two other children during the entire time Barnett was on the case. Barnett recognized that Katianne had completed the psychological and parenting assessment and had partially completed the recommendations of her assessments. Barnett described the case plan goal of positive family activities as kinda [sic] like a half complete, explaining, she attempts to go to the park and . . . she would put a swimming pool outside and try to get them out there in that way. However, some of the visitations are very chaotic. . . . While Katianne had requested increased visitation, with the chaos in the home, Barnett did not allow it. Visitation had been cut back to once a week because of a consistent amount of visitations being cancelled, and to provide Xavier with the structure that he needs in the foster home and at the daycare setting. Barnett had told Katianne once that if she could provide consistent visitation that month, Barnett would increase it, [a]nd [Katianne] was close, but not quite. Barnett did not think that Katianne had successfully followed the budget developed with Yount's assistance. Moreover, she noted that although Katianne had been continuously employed, she had been employed at approximately 14 different jobs. Like Yount, Barnett disapproved of the luxury items Katianne had rented or purchased. Barnett also stated that Katianne's bank account was constantly overdrawn; that she could not do a savings account; that Katianne's family is picking up the slack, paying bills; that the telephone had been shut off and there was no cellular telephone; and that the van had been repossessed. As to the case plan's goal of communication with the Department, Barnett stated that Katianne was inconsistent. In the beginning, Barnett explained, contact was very good. Katianne had even told Barnett when would be good times to do random urinalysis testing on the father because Katianne was trying to help him stay sober. Contact had recently diminished, however. Finally, Barnett testified that Katianne had not achieved the goal of time management. Nor did she believe that Katianne had completed the task of keeping people out of her home who would be a risk to her children. Barnett explained that Katianne still had some contact with Xavier's father. Barnett admitted that the only evidence of the father's danger to the children was Katianne's report that he had on previous occasions punched and kicked walls and that he had once threatened to kick Alita.