In the Interest of D. P.

The juvenile court's failure to make express findings of fact to support its legal conclusion that the 4-year-old child would suffer serious harm unless the mother's rights were terminated required reversal of the termination order.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The mother of four-year-old D. P. appeals from an order of the Juvenile Court of Coweta County that terminated her parental rights.1 She contends that there was insufficient clear and convincing evidence to support the court’s conclusions that termination of her parental rights was authorized by her failure to complete certain requirements while her son was in foster care, that her son’s deprivation is likely to continue, and that he will suffer serious harm unless her parental rights are terminated. For the following reasons, we agree with these contentions and, as a result, reverse the juvenile court’s termination order.

Before terminating a parent’s rights, a juvenile court must employ a two-prong test. In the first prong, the court must decide whether there is present clear and convincing evidence of parental misconduct or inability. Former OCGA § 15-11-94 a.2 Parental misconduct or inability, in turn, is proven by evidence showing: 1 that the child is deprived; 2 that lack of proper parental care or control is the cause of deprivation;3 3 that the cause of deprivation is likely to continue or will not likely be remedied; and 4 that continued deprivation is likely to cause serious physical, mental, emotional, or moral harm to the child. Former OCGA § 15-11-94 b 4 A. In the second prong of the termination test, the juvenile court must consider whether termination of parental rights would be in the best interest of the child, after considering the child’s physical, mental, emotional, and moral condition and needs, including the need for a secure, stable home. Former OCGA § 15-11-94 a.

In the Interest of D. P.

The juvenile court's failure to make express findings of fact to support its legal conclusion that the 4-year-old child would suffer serious harm unless the mother's rights were terminated required reversal of the termination order.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report