Appeal In Pima County Severance Action No. S-1607, Matter of

Decision Date04 November 1985
Docket NumberS-1607,No. 18197-PR,18197-PR
Citation709 P.2d 871,147 Ariz. 237
PartiesIn the Matter of the APPEAL IN PIMA COUNTY SEVERANCE ACTION NO.
CourtArizona Supreme Court

Bridegroom and Hayes by Raymond R. Hayes, Tucson, for appellant.

Warren H. Lynch, Tucson, for appellee.

HAYS, Justice.

This petition for review arises from an order of the juvenile court terminating the parent-child relationship between the respondent-father ("father") and his son. The termination order was based on the juvenile court's finding that the father abandoned his son and had further evidenced an intent to forego all parental duties and claims to the child. The court of appeals reversed, finding insufficient evidence to justify severance of the father's parental rights. It therefore vacated the juvenile court's order. We accepted review and have jurisdiction pursuant to Ariz. Const. art. 6, § 5(3), Rule 28, Rules of Procedure for the Juvenile Court, 17A A.R.S. Because we find the evidence sufficient to support the juvenile court's findings, we vacate the opinion of the court of appeals, 147 Ariz. 88, 708 P.2d 769 (App.1985). Petitioner-mother ("mother") and father were married in April, 1979. The child was born the following September. Later, after a separation of several months, the mother filed a petition for dissolution in October, 1981. The dissolution decree became final in October, 1982, and granted the mother custody of the child. The father was ordered to pay $150 per month for child support.

On January 6, 1984, the mother petitioned the court for termination of the parent-child relationship between the child and his natural father on the grounds that: (1) the father had abandoned his son; (2) he had made only token efforts to communicate with the child since the parties' divorce; and (3) he had not provided monthly support as ordered by the court. The petition also stated that the mother had remarried and that she and her present husband were supporting and raising the child.

A.R.S. § 8-533 establishes the grounds for termination of a parent-child relationship. Included as a ground for termination is the abandonment of a child by his or her parent. A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(1). To find abandonment under this statute requires evidence of "intentional conduct on the part of a parent which evinces a settled purpose to forego all parental duties and relinquish all parental claims to the child." Anonymous v. Anonymous, 25 Ariz.App. 10, 12, 540 P.2d 741, 743 (1975). Although the best interest of the child is a valid factor in deciding an abandonment issue, it cannot be the sole basis for termination. Rather, the appropriate test is whether there has been a conscious disregard of the obligations owed by a parent to a child, leading to the destruction of the parent-child relationship. Id. As these terms are somewhat elastic, issues of abandonment and intent are generally questions of fact to be resolved by the trial court. In re Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-4283, 133 Ariz. 598, 601, 653 P.2d 55, 58 (1982).

In the instant case, following a hearing on the mother's petition for severance, the juvenile court determined that the father had abandoned his son. This determination was based on the following:

THE COURT FURTHER FINDS, by clear and convincing evidence, that the father displayed less than meaningful efforts to maintain a parent/child relationship, and failed to exert any reasonable effort to maintain visitation and contact with the child, and that his efforts at support for the child were meaningless; the one support payment was barely a token.

The father's actions regarding the needs of this child, both from his emotional needs and his financial needs, are unconscionable and bereft of any sense of parental responsibility and concern for the welfare of the child. The father's actions demonstrate to the Court a conscious disregard for the child and his needs....

THE COURT FINDS that it would be better for this child to grow up in a normal father/son relationship, that is available to him at the present time, than to be subject to the sporadic attempts at fatherhood that might be expected by the present father....

[T]his father made no reasonable effort to support the child, and no reasonable effort to maintain contact with him. This child received no love, care, affection, support, or maintenance from this father, and there was not even sufficient contact for this Court to find that he demonstrated any participation or presence in the child's life.

On review, this court will accept the juvenile court's findings of fact in support of severing the parent-child relationship unless they are clearly erroneous. In re Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-4374, 137 Ariz. 19, 21, 667 P.2d 1345, 1347 (App.1983). Furthermore, the juvenile court will be deemed to have made every finding necessary to support the judgment. In re Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-3594, 133 Ariz. 582, 585, 653 P.2d 39, 42 (App.1982).

We are satisfied that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the juvenile c...

To continue reading

Request your trial
48 cases
  • Logan B. v. Dep't of Child Safety
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • May 24, 2018
    ..."the juvenile court will be deemed to have made every finding necessary to support the judgment." Pima Cty. Severance Action No. S - 1607 , 147 Ariz. 237, 238, 709 P.2d 871, 872 (1985). That principle is consistent with the waiver doctrine, and should be applied here. Mary Lou C. v. Ariz. D......
  • Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-8287, Matter of, JS-8287
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • November 29, 1991
    ...court will be deemed to have made every finding necessary to support the judgment." Matter of Appeal in Pima County Severance Action No. S-1607, 147 Ariz. 237, 238, 709 P.2d 871, 872 (1985) (citations omitted); see Appeal in Yavapai County Juvenile Action No. J-9956, 818 P.2d 163 (App.1991)......
  • Angel S. v. Dep't of Child Safety
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • March 31, 2015
    ...if reasonable evidence supports the order.” Mary Lou C., 207 Ariz. at 50, ¶ 17, 83 P.3d at 50 (citing Pima Cnty. Severance Action No. S–1607, 147 Ariz. 237, 238, 709 P.2d 871, 872 (1985)). “If the juvenile court fails to expressly make a necessary finding, we may examine the record to deter......
  • Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JS-9104, Matter of
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • June 6, 1995
    ...County Juvenile Action No. JS-501568, 177 Ariz. 571, 576, 869 P.2d 1224, 1229 (App.1994) (citing Pima County Severance Action No. S-1607, 147 Ariz. 237, 238, 709 P.2d 871, 872 (1985)); Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-8441, 175 Ariz. 463, 465, 857 P.2d. 1317, 1319 (App.1993); Pima Cou......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT