In re D.K.

Court of Appeals of Indiana · 2012 · Family Law

Family LawTermination of Parental RightsCHINStermination of parental rightsCHINSconditions not remediedclear and convincing evidencebest interests

Facts

D.K. was removed from Mother's care in March 2009 after DCS substantiated neglect, finding him with an unrelated caregiver who was asleep and the residence lacking proper food and clothing, while Mother also faced eviction. In the CHINS case, Mother was ordered to complete parenting education, attend visitation, and obtain stable housing and employment, but over more than two years she moved among at least eight residences, had only intermittent employment, and never completed the required parenting classes. D.K. was briefly returned to Mother while she lived in a group home, but he was returned to foster care after Mother knowingly violated the home's rules by having boyfriends stay overnight and possessing alcohol. After DCS reinitiated services in 2011, Mother cancelled and missed intake appointments, and at the termination hearing she was unemployed though planning to move into a new apartment.

Issue

Whether there was sufficient evidence to support termination of Mother's parental rights, specifically whether there was a reasonable probability that the conditions resulting in D.K.'s removal and continued placement outside Mother's care would not be remedied.

Rule

Under Indiana Code section 31-35-2-4(b)(2), termination requires clear and convincing evidence of the statutory elements. To determine whether there is a reasonable probability that conditions leading to removal will not be remedied, the court evaluates the parent's fitness at the time of the termination hearing, considers changed conditions, may consider reasons for continued placement outside the home as well as initial removal, and may weigh habitual patterns of conduct including housing and employment instability and the parent's response to offered services.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Fort Wayne, Lena Ortiz's daughter was removed after neglect findings, and the child remained in foster care for nearly three years. During that period Lena never completed ordered parenting instruction, changed homes repeatedly, and was unemployed for long stretches; five days before the termination hearing, she signed a lease for an apartment and testified she was ready to start over.

Which is the strongest argument for the agency that the statutory "conditions will not be remedied" element is still satisfied?

Explanation. The majority opinion states that the court judges parental fitness at the time of the termination hearing and considers changed conditions, but it also may weigh the parent's habitual patterns of conduct. A trial court is not required to accept a last-minute improvement as trumping years of instability in housing, employment, and failure to complete services. (Derived from In re D.K. (n.d.).)