Opinion ID: 1539660
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Best Interests Require Termination

Text: In order to terminate a party's parental rights, the record in the Family Court must establish not only abandonment or failure to plan, but also that the termination is in the best interest of the child. [24] Under the best interest standard, there must be clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is essential to the child's welfare. [25] The factors enumerated in title 13, section 722(a) govern the court's best interest determination in a termination of parental rights proceeding. [26] This Court has held that, while all of the factors in section 722 must be considered by the court, when balancing the relevant factors, the Family Court may give different weight to different factors. [27] The amount of weight given to one factor or combination of factors will be different in any given proceeding. It is quite possible that the weight of one factor will counterbalance the combined weight of all other factors and be outcome-determinative in some situations. [28] Barr contends that the Family Court committed clear error in determining that termination of Barr's parental rights would be in the best interests of Nancy. Barr argues that there is not clear and convincing evidence in the record to support a number of the factors and, in fact, there is no evidence in the record with regard to the interests of Nancy. This claim is without merit as the Family Court properly considered each of the factors in section 722. First, the Family Court considered the wishes of the child's parents. [29] The court correctly stated that Barr was opposed to the granting of the TPR petition. The court also stated that Barr did not wish for Nancy to be placed in his care. This finding is supported by Barr's failure to case plan for reunification with his daughter. Once released from incarceration, Barr left the state of Delaware, never attempted to visit Nancy, and made no attempt to case plan with DFS for seven months. Although Barr claims that his attempts to case plan were thwarted by DFS, he made no effort to case plan until seven months after he was released from prison and three months before the TPR hearing. Even though he was reminded of the elements of his case plan and that he would have to complete these elements on his own, Barr failed to make any progress with his case plan or request to visit Nancy during the three months preceding the TPR hearing. At the time of the TPR hearing, Barr was incarcerated pending trial and was unable to provide a home for his daughter. Accordingly, there was clear and convincing evidence of a lack of care, contact and ability to provide for Nancy, which supports the finding of the Family Court that Barr did not want her to be placed in his care, even if he did not specifically so state. The Family Court next considered the second factor, the child's wishes. [30] The court found that there was no evidence presented as to Nancy's wishes; however, the Court-Appointed Special Advocate supported the TPR petition. In Powell v. Department of Services for Children, Youth and their Families, there was no evidence presented as to the child's wishes because the child was too young to adequately express his opinion. There was also no evidence presented as to whether there was domestic violence. We found that this did not prevent the Family Court from considering those factors in a manner contemplated by section 722 and did not prevent the court from balancing the factors to determine the best interests of the child. [31] Third, the trial judge considered the child's interaction with significant adults in her life, with other persons in the home and with other persons who may significantly affect her best interests. [32] The record indicates that Barr's repeated incarcerations over the course of Nancy's life prevented him from having contact with her. The record also indicates that when not incarcerated, Barr failed to arrange visitation with Nancy or show an interest in her life. Thus, the court found that Barr had failed to be a consistent part of Nancy's life. The court also noted that the Mother's parental rights were terminated. These findings are supported by the record. The trial judge then considered the child's adjustment to her home, school and community under the fourth factor. [33] The court noted that, in contrast to the damaging instability she experienced in the custody of the Mother, Nancy had been in a foster home since July 25, 2007, and has remained in the same schools and the same community during that time. These findings are supported by the record. The trial judge next considered the mental and physical health of all persons involved under the fifth factor. [34] The court noted that Nancy suffers from issues of anger, separation, loss and abandonment, and attends counseling for these issues. The court also found that the Mother suffers from Dysthymic Disorder (chronic depression) and Personality Disorder, and despite repeated domestic violence, continually lets Barr back into her life, thereby creating a situation dangerous to Nancy's mental and physical health. No evidence of Barr's physical or mental health was presented to the court. These findings are supported by the record. Sixth, the trial judge considered the parents' past and present compliance with their rights and responsibilities to their child under title 13, section 701. [35] The court noted that Barr failed to ever make any payments for child support. These findings are supported by the record. Under the seventh factor, the trial judge may consider any evidence of domestic violence. [36] Barr argues that there is no reliable evidence in the record to support the court's finding, other than the hearsay contained in the Social Report. As noted above, the statement contained in the Social Report is not hearsay. Accordingly, the court's finding of Barr's repeated instances of domestic violence, including a 1999 arrest after Barr assaulted the Mother, who was pregnant with Nancy at the time, are supported by the record. Finally, the court considered Barr's extensive criminal history. [37] Barr has been convicted of five felonies, thirty-eight misdemeanors, and two violations of parole. These findings are supported by the record. The Family Court properly considered each of the factors in section 722. The trial judge's conclusion that the termination of Barr's parental rights was in the best interests of Nancy is supported by the record. It is also the product of an orderly and logical deductive process.