Court Opinion

ID: 9626040
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 07:59:58.804238+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:06:19.943674
License: Public Domain

Judge Wynn
dissenting:
While I agree with the majority’s conclusion that respondent failed to provide substantial financial support to the child, there is nothing in the record before us to indicate that it was in the best interest of the child to terminate respondent’s parental rights. See, In re Nolen, 117 N.C. App. 693, 700, 453 S.E.2d 220, 225 (1995) (holding that the trial judge is not required to terminate a parent’s rights even though grounds for termination are found to exist; if the best interest of the child requires that the parent’s rights not be terminated, the court must dismiss the petition).
Terminating the father’s parental rights carries with it the ancillary action of terminating his responsibility to provide and support his child. In short, this child’s right to seek support from his father is also terminated.1 Yet, no findings of facts were made by the trial court to support the inherent conclusion that it is in the best interest of this child to cut off the father’s responsibility to provide support to him. As this court noted in Bost v. Van Nortwick, 117 N.C. App. 1, 449 S.E.2d 911 (1994): “[i]n reviewing this case to determine whether the *375trial court properly granted petitioner’s wish to terminate respondent’s parental rights, we must keep in mind that the overriding consideration is the welfare or best interest of the [child], in light of all the circumstances.” Id. at 7-8, 449 S.E.2d at 915.
Moreover, although in this case the child is represented by a guardian ad litem, there appears to be no evidence to show that the best interest of this child would be to sever all legal connections with his biological father.2 In fact, there is no evidence to show that anyone else will stand in this father’s stead to support the child.3
A parental rights termination proceeding which in effect terminates a parent’s responsibility to provide support for the child should include findings of facts that support the legal conclusion that it is in the best interest of the child to terminate both the parent’s responsibility and the child’s rights to support. But cf. In re Caldwell, 75 N.C. App. 299, 330 S.E.2d 513 (1985). I would therefore remand this proceeding to district court for findings of fact to support the conclusion that it is in the best interest of the child to terminate his father’s responsibility to support him.

. Moreover, often the State of North Carolina has an interest as to whether a parent’s responsibility to support his or her child should be terminated — most notably in instances where the child receives public assistance from the Department of Social Services.

. It may be that the remaining parent is willing and financially able to accept the full responsibility of supporting the child, in effect holding harmless the termination of the father’s responsibility to support. It is further recognized that in many instances the single parent shoulders this responsibility because the other parent refuses or is unable to support the child. The emphasis here, however, is on the termination of the responsibility to support, not the enforcement of that responsibility.

. In some instances there may be another person who seeks to adopt the child upon the termination of the biological parent’s parental rights. In my opinion, the adoption and termination proceedings should be dependent and contingent; thus covering the gap between the time of the termination and adoption.