Appellant, the biological father of A. D. I and D. I, minor children, appeals from the order of the Juvenile Court of Douglas County terminating his parental rights to the children pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-94.1 For the following reasons, we affirm. Under OCGA § 15-11-94, the juvenile court must engage in a two-step process to determine whether the criteria for termination of parental rights has been established. In the first step, the court must determine pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-94 a “whether there is present clear and convincing evidence of parental misconduct or inability.” Such parental misconduct or inability exists where pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-94 b 4 A the court finds clear and convincing evidence of the following four factors: “i The child is a deprived child, as such term is defined in Code Section 15-11-2; ii The lack of proper parental care or control by the parent in question is the cause of the child’s status as deprived; iii Such cause of deprivation is likely to continue or will not likely be remedied; and iv The continued deprivation will cause or is likely to cause serious physical, mental, emotional, or moral harm to the child.” Where the court finds that parental misconduct or inability is established under the above four factors, then the court proceeds to the second step by determining under OCGA § 15-11-94 a “whether termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the child, after considering the physical, mental, emotional, and moral condition and needs of the child who is the subject of the proceeding, including the need for a secure and stable home.” On appeal from a juvenile court’s decision to terminate parental rights under OCGA 15-11-94, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the court’s decision and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights should be terminated. In the Interest of S. G. , 271 Ga. App. 776, 778 611 SE2d 86 2005. Applying these standards, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the juvenile court’s decision to terminate Appellant’s parental rights to the children.
A. D. I. was six years old and D. I. was less than a year old when the juvenile court entered an order in July 2005 placing them in shelter care in the temporary custody of the Douglas County Department of Family and Children Services DFACS. The order was based on findings that the mother and the Appellant neglected D. I.’s medical condition, and that both children were left without proper care and supervision. The juvenile court subsequently adjudicated that the children were deprived in September 2005 based on findings that the children’s medical and other needs were being neglected; that the home was unclean; that the Appellant was abusing alcohol; that the mother had serious mental health problems; that the Appellant and the mother were unable to maintain stable employment to provide for the children, and that the Appellant and the mother had failed to cooperate with DFACS to address these problems. The court also ordered compliance with the terms of a case plan prepared pursuant to OCGA § 15-11-58 to reunify the Appellant and the mother with the children. Under the plan, the Appellant was ordered to cooperate with a substance abuse assessment; submit to random drug and alcohol abuse screens; complete psychological testing; attend parenting classes; be present at medical appointments scheduled for the children; maintain and verify to the case manager stable full-time employment sufficient to meet the needs of the children, and maintain housing sufficient to meet the needs of the children.
