Bollinger v. Christopher J. (In re Adoption S.B.)
| Decision Date | 19 July 2017 |
| Docket Number | Appeal No. 3-17-0114 |
| Citation | 2017 IL App (3d) 170114 -U |
| Parties | In re ADOPTION OF S.B., a Minor, (Jami Bollinger and Tyler Crouse, Petitioners-Appellants v. Christopher J., Respondent-Appellee). |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the 14th Judicial Circuit, Rock Island County, Illinois,
Circuit No. 15-AD-45
Honorable Peter Church, Judge, Presiding.
¶ 1 Held: The trial court erred when it found that it was not in the best interest of the minor to terminate the parental rights of the respondent after it found that the respondent was unfit.
¶ 2 Jami Bollinger and Christopher J. dated between April and July of 2009. Jamie had a child, S.B., in January 2010. Christopher subsequently acknowledged that S.B. was his child, but was not present at her birth and no contact with the minor thereafter. Jami and Tyler Crouse began a relationship in October 2015 and began living together sometime thereafter. At the same time that Jami and Tyler began their relationship, Christopher filed a petition seeking visitation with S.B. On November 9, 2015, Jami and Tyler filed a petition seeking to terminate Christopher's parental rights and to have Tyler adopt S.B. Jami and Tyler were married in March 2016. A bifurcated hearing on their petition was held on January 6, 2017.
¶ 3 Following the hearing to address Christopher's parental fitness, the circuit court entered an order finding that Christopher was unfit due to a failure to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern and/or responsibility toward S.B. Following the best interest hearing, later that same day, the court found that it was not in the best interest of S.B. that Christopher's parental rights be terminated and denied the petition for adoption. Jamie and Tyler appeal the circuit court's order finding that it was not in S.B.'s best interest to terminate Christopher's parental rights. Christopher did not appeal the court's finding that he was unfit. We reverse the circuit court's best interest determination and remand the matter for entry of an order terminating Christopher's parental rights and a further determination regarding the petition for adoption.
¶ 5 Jami and Christopher were involved in a relationship for approximately four months in 2009. They never lived together and had stopped seeing each other approximately six months prior to the birth of S.B. After S.B. was born, Jami took a break from college, but ultimately obtained a Bachelor's degree from St. Ambrose University and began work in a Master's program. While completing her advanced degree in social work, Jami began employment with the Center for Youth and Family Solutions. The record established that S.B. had been under Jami's exclusive care, custody, and control since birth. Jami testified that S.B. does not know who her biological father is, has never met Christopher, and would not recognize him if they were ever to be in the same room.
¶ 6 Christopher testified that he graduated from welding school in 2008 and has been continuously employed as a pipefitter/welder by United Construction out of Eldridge, Iowa since graduating from welding school. He testified that his work causes him to travel up to 20 weeks per year, taking him to job sites from Wyoming to New York. Christopher further testified that he had wanted to be part of S.B.'s life, but he "knew it would be a slow go" due to Jami's attitude toward him. He also testified that he had never provided any financial support, nor made any attempt to send cards, gifts, letters or made any attempt to communicate with S.B., who was seven years of age at the time of the hearing. He claimed that he had driven past Jami's parent's home on occasions when he thought S.B. was there, but he never stopped because he thought they might have him arrested if he stopped.
¶ 7 The court found Christopher to be unfit under sections 1(D)(b) and (n)(2)(ii) of the Adoption Act (750 ILCS 50/1(D)(b) and (n)(2)(ii) (West 2012)) concluding that he had failed to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern or responsibility as to S.B.'s welfare, and failed to provide reasonable financial support since the child's birth. After finding Christopher to be an unfit parent, the court proceeded to a hearing on whether the best interests of the child were served by terminating Christopher's parental rights and granting the adoption petition.
¶ 8 At the best interest hearing, Tyler Crouse testified that he wished to formally adopt S.B. and take on the emotional and financial responsibility of parenting S.B. along with Jami, whom he married in March 2016. Tyler also testified that since beginning his relationship with Jami, he has treated S.B. as if she was his own child; teaching her to ride a bicycle, helping with her homework, playing games with her, reading to her and helping her to learn how to read, and helping her with age appropriate household chores. He also testified that when he came home from work, S.B. would often run to him, hug him, and tell him about her day. In addition, Tylerfurther testified that he has the financial means to support, nurture, and educate S.B. He testified that he has been continuously employed as a corrections officer at the Henry Hill facility of the Illinois Department of Corrections since 2008, where he works 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. He wants S.B. to know that he will always be there to support her and wants to formally adopt her in order to express his full commitment to her and Jami.
¶ 9 Jami testified that S.B. is well adjusted to their life with Tyler and is very loving and affectionate toward him. She also testified that Tyler is very supportive and affectionate toward S.B., observing that when S.B. became ill, it was Tyler who would get up in the night to take care of her. Jami testified that on a recent trip to Disneyland, which Tyler could not attend due to work, S.B. called Tyler every night to tell him about her day. Jami opined that it would be in S.B.'s best interest for Tyler to adopt her because Tyler has always been there for S.B., has shown her love and support, and S.B. is very attached to him, often referring to Tyler as "Dad." Jami testified without objection that S.B. told her that she wants Tyler to adopt her and wants to change her last name to Crouse.
¶ 10 Jennifer and Jason Bollinger, Jami's mother and father, each testified that S.B. appears to be healthy and happy with Jami and Tyler. They both testified that they observed S.B. interact with Tyler on several occasions. Both S.B. and Tyler were always happy and engaged and, along with Jami, always gave the appearance of a happy family.
¶ 11 Christopher testified that he has a home on 16 acres located outside Viola, Illinois, where he lives with his girlfriend and her six-year-old son. He testified that he has a bedroom set up for S.B. with a bed, dress, clothes in a closet and Christmas presents for S.B. He further testified that his income earning potential is good and he has an expectation of continued employment as a pipefitter/welder. Although he admitted that he has not participated in the financial support ofS.B., he is now ready to provide some level of support. He testified that he has no desire to take S.B. away from Jami or Tyler, and that he merely seeks to have a relationship with S.B. He testified that he believed that it was in S.B.'s best interest that his rights not be terminated and that Tyler not be allowed to adopt her since he is her biological father, he wishes to be part of her life, and he wants to participate with child-raising activities with her. He also opined that it would be in S.B.'s best interest that she should have a relationship with his extended family, although he admitted that she has never met any member of his family.
¶ 12 Christopher acknowledged that S.B. has never had a connection to him or his extended family at any time. He again acknowledged that if S.B. "were to walk into the courtroom, she would not recognize [him]."
¶ 13 The guardian ad litem (GAL) reported that Jami, Tyler, and S.B. presented a very stable, close, and happy family unit, and that it was unquestionably in the child's best interest that she should remain part of this family unit. The GAL opined, however, that it would be in the best interest of S.B. that she should have the opportunity, as she became older, to "know about" her biological father and have "an opportunity to explore" a relationship with him. The GAL opined that it would be a mistake to terminate the biological father's parental rights because doing so might prevent S.B. from having a possible future relationship with him.
¶ 14 At the conclusion of the hearing, the court noted that the best interest standards set forth in section 1-3(4.05) of the Juvenile Court Act should apply in the instant matter. 705 ILCS 405/1-3(4.05) (West 2012). The court then accepted the analysis articulated by the GAL, finding that S.B. having a possible future relationship with Christopher outweighed all other factors which weighed in favor of termination of his parental rights and granting the petition for Tyler to adopt S.B. The court speculated that, even if he were not permitted to adopt S.B., Tyler wouldalways remain her de facto father, and would, at some future date, willingly share that role with Christopher. The court further observed that, at some point in the future, Christopher would be expected show some degree of interest "going forward" in order to establish a father-daughter relationship with S.B., which the court acknowledged more accurately described Tyler's current relationship with S.B. The court further noted that S.B. already had a guaranteed...
To continue reading
Request your trial