In the Interest of D. S.

The clear and convincing evidence did not show that the child was without the proper care for his emotional health, since the state only presented one episode in which the child's stepfather criticized him directly and the mother immediately removed her children from the situation at that time.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

A Pike County juvenile court found J. W. deprived and awarded temporary custody of him to the Department of Family and Children Services “DFCS”.1 His mother appeals the order, and, for reasons that follow, we reverse. A deprived child is one who is “without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for the child’s physical, mental, or emotional health or morals.”2 In determining whether a child is deprived, the court focuses on the needs of the child rather than parental fault.3 However, a finding that a child is deprived does not necessarily result in a loss of custody by the parent. Even a temporary loss of custody is not authorized unless the deprivation “resulted from unfitness on the part of the parent, that is, either intentional or unintentional misconduct resulting in the abuse or neglect of the child or by what is tantamount to physical or mental incapability to care for the child.”4 This standard “safeguards the high value society places on the integrity of the family unit and helps eliminate the risk that a factfinder might base his determination on a few isolated instances of unusual conduct or idiosyncratic behavior.”5

On appeal from a finding of deprivation, we “review the evidence in a light most favorable to the juvenile court’s judgment and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the child was deprived and whether, under the circumstances, the court properly awarded temporary custody of the child.”6 We do not weigh the evidence or evaluate witness credibility, but defer to the juvenile court’s factfinding.7 Applying this standard, the evidence shows that J. W., who was twelve years old at the time of the hearing, lived with his mother, stepfather, and a four year old stepbrother, D. S. J. W. has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder “ADHD”.

In the Interest of D. S.

The clear and convincing evidence did not show that the child was without the proper care for his emotional health, since the state only presented one episode in which the child's stepfather criticized him directly and the mother immediately removed her children from the situation at that time.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report