Court Opinion

ID: 9620111
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:38:34.029012+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:07:45.627806
License: Public Domain

Josephine Linker Hart, Judge, dissenting. The circuit court terminated the parental rights of appellant, Kurt Belue, after finding that he failed to comply with the case plan. Specifically, the court found that he failed to maintain stable and appropriate housing, failed to maintain stable employment, failed to maintain stable and safe transportation, failed to benefit from anger-management classes, failed to quit smoking, faded to make progress in his counseling sessions, and admitted that he is not capable of managing his own finances. The court’s findings on each were clearly erroneous. In fact, the evidence presented was similar to the evidence presented in Strickland v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 103 Ark. App. 193, 287 S.W.3d 633 (2008),where we reversed a circuit court’s termination order. Given the similarities, we are obliged to reverse here as well, and thus I respectfully dissent. Stable and appropriate housing. Belue had a one-bedroom apartment, which he planned to upgrade when his four children were returned to him. Belue was similarly situated to the mother in Strickland. There, the mother also lived in a one-bedroom apartment, which she planned to upgrade to a three-bedroom apartment when her two children were returned to her. Stable employment. Belue testified that he had been disabled in a 2005 car accident and was pursuing a Social Security disability claim that he and his attorney hoped to resolve within a year. In the meantime, he was living on food stamps and the proceeds from a car-accident settlement, and DHS did not put on any evidence suggesting that he could not provide for his children by relying on these resources. In Strickland, the mother could similarly support herself and her children on her disability income of $623 a month and food stamps. The majority challenges the legitimacy of Belue’s disability claim by citing testimony from a case worker that Belue limped sometimes and at other times did not. His injury, however, was a brain injury, so the testimony regarding his limping is of no evidentiary value. Stable and safe transportation. Belue acquired a car in the months before the termination hearing. In Strickland, the mother had a transportation system in place, although, unlike the father in this case, she did not even own a car. By owning a car, Belue was better situated than the mother in Strickland. Anger management. The court also relied on Belue’s supposed lack of benefit from anger-management classes. Belue, however, had only been seeing the counselor who testified for a little more than two months, he had made progress regarding his anger issues after just two months, and there was no proof that his anger had harmed his children. Similarly, in Strickland, though the mother suffered from limited cognitive abilities and depression, there was no evidence that it adversely affected her parenting skills. Smoking. The circuit court also cited the father’s failure to stop smoking as a reason for termination, but the court did not order the father to stop smoking. He was ordered to maintain smoke-free housing, and he testified that he smoked outside. Counseling. Belue attended counseling, completed parenting classes, and visited his children regularly. In Strickland, the mother also had completed parenting classes and visited her children. While the majority notes that Belue had difficulty interacting with the children during visits, the case worker testified that this had improved in the last two months. The majority also notes that Belue complained at the hearing that DHS had not done enough to help him. Surely this does not support termination. Managing finances. The court pointed to Belue’s inability to manage his finances. But Belue said that he relied on a support system, his mother, to manage his money, which I think shows an intelligent use of his resources. While the majority also notes that he did not provide child-support to another child, Belue testified that he no longer owed any child support, and there is no evidence in the record to controvert this. Given the similarities between this case and Strickland, we should reverse. Hunt, J., joins.