Opinion ID: 1539660
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Continuing Intent To Abandon

Text: The Family Court found that Barr had a present continuing intent to abandon up to the time the termination proceedings were filed. The court noted that despite being intermittently around the Mother and Nancy for ten years, Barr repeatedly indicated a complete lack of interest in parenting [Nancy]. Barr argues that the court improperly relied upon a hearsay statement in a Social Report prepared by DFS and admitted into evidence, that Barr stated in 1999 that he would not be planning with the Division and that the mother would be on her own to plan with the agency. Barr asserts that while the alleged statement is an admission by a party-opponent, its recounting in the Social Report is hearsay because the evidence was not communicated by a witness at the TPR hearing. Barr further asserts that even if the statement is admissible, it merely indicates his intention as of 1999, and not as of 2007. `Hearsay' is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. [17] Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by law or by the Delaware Uniform Rules of Evidence. [18] A statement offered against a party which is his own statement, is an admission by a party-opponent and is not hearsay. [19] In addition, records, reports, statements or data compilations, in any form, of a public office or agency setting forth its regularly conducted and regularly recorded activities, or matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law and as to which there was a duty to report, or factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law are not excluded by the rule against the admission of hearsay. [20] This exception does not apply to investigative reports prepared by or for a government, a public office or an agency when offered by it in a case in which it is a party. [21] In this case, the only objection to the Social Report at the hearing was that the report contained hearsay information, not that the report itself was inadmissible. The challenged statement was an admission by Barr at a 1999 meeting with DFS's Intensive Reunification Unit, in which he refused to plan with DFS, expressed his intent never to plan with DFS, and said that the Mother would have to plan with DFS on her own. The statement is offered against Barr and is his own statement. Therefore it is an admission by a party-opponent and is not hearsay. This admissible statement was introduced at trial in the Social Report, which is prepared by the DFS permanency worker to summarize the case after reviewing the entire DFS record. The worker prepares the report pursuant to the mandates of title 13, section 1105(c) of the Delaware Code. [22] The report is produced at the end of the case when the goal has been changed to TPR and adoption. Therefore, the Social Report is admissible as an exception to the rule against hearsay. The statement is relevant as to Barr's intent to abandon because it indicates that Barr did not wish to case plan for Nancy in 1999. When considered with other evidence in this case, the evidence shows a pattern of unwillingness or inaction by Barr from 1999 until the August 2008 TPR hearing. Barr also argues that his conduct demonstrates that he wanted to communicate with his daughter and only ceased doing so after May 2007 because DFS would not permit him to contact Nancy at her new foster home. Thus, he asserts that there was no clear and convincing evidence of a present continuing intent to abandon Nancy. The record reflects, however, that Barr made no attempt to have contact with Nancy while she was residing with a relative between May 2007 and the time she was placed in the foster home on July 25, 2007. After she was placed in the foster home, Barr would have been permitted visitation with her if he had been case planning with DFS for reunification with Nancy; however, Barr failed to do so. Accordingly, the record supports the Family Court's conclusion that Barr had a present continuing intent to abandon Nancy.