Opinion ID: 1057621
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Comparative Fitness Analysis

Text: One stated purpose of Tennessee's adoption statutes is to protect [t]he rights of children to be raised in loving homes that are capable of providing proper care for adopted children and that the best interests of children in the adoptive process are protected. Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-1-101(a)(3) (2005). Although Tennessee's adoption statutes do not outline a specific procedure by which a trial court evaluates two competing adoption petitions, a comparative fitness analysis furthers the purpose of ensuring that a child is placed in the best possible home. Indeed, trial courts currently engage in a comparative fitness analysis to determine which parent is the more fit custodian. In re C.K.G., 173 S.W.3d at 732; Parker v. Parker, 986 S.W.2d 557, 562 (Tenn.1999); see Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-106 (2005 & Supp.2009). In this case, the trial court permitted both sets of grandparents to present evidence regarding their fitness, their ability to provide for Sidney financially, and Sidney's best interests. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-120(a)(10), (11), (13). In granting the paternal grandparents' adoption petition, the trial court made specific findings of fact that are included in the final decree of adoption. [3] We presume that the trial court's findings of fact are correct, and we will not disturb those findings unless the evidence preponderates against them. Tenn. R.App. P. 13(d); Bogan v. Bogan, 60 S.W.3d 721, 727 (Tenn. 2001). When issues of credibility and weight of testimony are involved, we afford considerable deference to the trial court's findings of fact. Larsen-Ball v. Ball, 301 S.W.3d 228, 235 (Tenn.2010). We may infer the trial court's findings on issues of credibility and weight of testimony from the manner in which the trial court resolved conflicts in the testimony and decided the case. Interstate Mech. Contractors, Inc. v. McIntosh, 229 S.W.3d 674, 678 (Tenn.2007). Sidney was seven years old at the time of the hearing on the adoption petitions in May 2008. During the three years and four months that Sidney lived with her maternal grandparents, she visited her paternal grandparents one weekend per month. Continuity and the length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment are important factors in determining the best interests of a child. Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-6-106(a)(3). In granting the paternal grandparents' adoption petition, however, the trial court implicitly found that other evidence introduced at the hearing outweighed this factor. We agree. The trial court first found that the paternal grandparents were collectively younger than the maternal grandparents. Indeed, the paternal grandfather and grandmother were seventy-three and sixty-six respectively, and the maternal grandfather and grandmother were seventy-six and seventy-one respectively. The trial court also found that the paternal grandparents had excellent parenting skills and experience in rearing children of Sidney's age. In support of this finding, the trial court heard testimony that the paternal grandparents raised their own three children and seven foster children. The trial court observed, moreover, that the paternal grandparents were better able to assist [Sidney] educationally and [were] more involved in church and social activities that would benefit Sidney. The evidence does not preponderate against this finding. The paternal grandparents lived three miles from the elementary school that Sidney would attend if they were permitted to adopt her. For the past forty-five years, they had served on committees, taught classes, and coached sports at their church. The paternal grandmother also worked in the church day care for twenty-three years. On the weekends that she was with her paternal grandparents, Sidney participated in a Sunday school class and attended services. Regarding social activities, various witnesses described the paternal grandparents' involvement with the little league sports program operated by Jackson Parks and Recreation. For over forty years, the paternal grandfather coached little league baseball, during which time the paternal grandmother served as the league secretary. The trial court also found that the paternal grandparents had a closer relationship with their extended family and adult children and ... a better support group available to assist them if necessary. In light of the extensive testimony from Sidney's paternal relatives concerning their ability and willingness to assist Sidney's paternal grandparents, we find that the evidence does not preponderate against this finding. Although not a controlling consideration, the trial court also found that the paternal grandparents had more financial resources available to them. The evidence presented at trial indicates that both sets of grandparents were financially capable of providing for Sidney. The evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's finding, however, that the paternal grandparents were in a better position to provide for Sidney financially. Finally, the trial court found that the paternal grandparents would be able to help Sidney deal with her mother's death in a more positive fashion and that this [would] benefit [Sidney] in later years. The following evidence presented at the hearing supports this determination. In his deposition, which was admitted into evidence, Sidney's father described his first telephone conversation with Sidney after his incarceration. During this conversation, he apologized to Sidney for killing her mother and told her that he was out of [his] mind. The paternal grandparents testified that Sidney, who was six years old at the time, appeared excited to speak to her father and that, if permitted to adopt Sidney, they would allow her to communicate with her father if she so desired but only after consulting a therapist regarding how best to facilitate that relationship. When asked what she told Sidney about the events surrounding Sidney's mother's death, the paternal grandmother stated that she drove Sidney by the jail and explained that Sidney's father had to live there now as punishment and that jail was kind of like in timeout when you've done something you shouldn't do. The maternal grandmother testified that, before Sidney spoke to her father, she told Sidney only that her father could not continue living at home after Sidney's mother had gone to heaven. Sidney later asked more questions and expressed fear that something was going to happen to her or to her maternal grandparents. In response, the maternal grandparents withheld visitation from the paternal grandparents. [4] The maternal grandmother also described to Sidney the events surrounding her mother's death. Specifically, the maternal grandmother told Sidney that her father shot her mother in the head three times and then he went back and reshot her [for] a total of eleven times, that he had told several people that he was going to kill her mother, and that they would put an i.v. in his arm like they did when you went to the hospital to take his life for killing her mother. The maternal grandmother admitted that in Sidney's presence she had referred to Sidney's father as evil and said that she was angry with Sidney's paternal grandmother for letting Sidney speak to her father. While the maternal grandparents' feelings of anger toward Sidney's father and grief over the loss of their daughter are understandable, we agree with the trial court that it is in Sidney's best interests that this tragic event fade from her mind and that she be left only with the warm memories of her mother as can be provided by both sets of grandparents. She should not be burdened any more than necessary with the details of her mother's death and the surrounding events. Having conducted a thorough review of the record, we find that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's findings that the paternal grandparents were fit, that they were capable of providing for Sidney financially, and that Sidney's best interests would be served by granting their petition. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 36-1-120(a)(10), (11), (13).