Easter v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
| Decision Date | 02 October 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. CV-19-393,CV-19-393 |
| Citation | 587 S.W.3d 604,2019 Ark. App. 441 |
| Parties | Amanda EASTER, Appellant v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES and Minor Children, Appellees |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
Leah Lanford, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for appellant.
Ellen K. Howard, Jonesboro, Office of Chief Counsel, for appellee.
Chrestman Group, PLLC, by: Keith L. Chrestman, attorney ad litem for minor children.
Appellant Amanda Easter appeals from the February 4, 2019 order of the Conway County Circuit Court terminating her parental rights to her children. Easter challenges the circuit court's findings on statutory grounds for termination and best interest. We find no error and affirm.
Easter is the mother of KY (born 7/26/2016) and twins HE and NE (born 9/05/2012). HE and NE's legal father, Russell Easter, filed a consent to termination. KY's father is not a party to this appeal. This is not the first contact the Arkansas Department of Human Services (Department) has had with this family. In 2014, the twins spent six months in foster care due to environmental neglect and inadequate supervision resulting from Easter's use of methamphetamine.
On June 5, 2017, the Department exercised an emergency hold on the children and filed a petition for emergency custody and dependency-neglect two days later. The Department initiated an investigation into the welfare of the children after receiving information from a caller to its hotline that the children were being left alone while Easter "runs around the trailer park high on methamphetamine" and that two of the children had feeding tubes and were not being fed properly. The social worker who responded to the call determined that the children could not safely remain in the home because Easter tested positive for methamphetamine and appeared to be under the influence. The circuit court entered an ex parte order of emergency custody on June 7. On June 9, the circuit court held a probable-cause hearing, and it found that probable cause existed for the children to remain in the Department's custody.
At the adjudication hearing conducted on July 27, the court adjudicated the children dependent-neglected after Easter stipulated that the children had not been adequately supervised due to her drug use. The circuit court established a goal of reunification. Easter was ordered to comply with the standard welfare orders of the Department that, among other things, ordered her to submit to random drug screens, attend and complete parenting classes, obtain and maintain stable and appropriate housing and gainful employment, attend counseling, and submit to a drug-and-alcohol assessment.
At a review hearing on October 26, the court found that Easter had complied with the case plan but noted that she had not been able to maintain steady housing and employment. The goal of the case continued to be reunification.
At a February 1, 2018 review hearing, the court found that Easter had "substantially complied" with the case plan and the court's orders. The court noted specifically that she had submitted to a psychological evaluation as well as a drug-and-alcohol assessment but that she had elected to wait for inpatient treatment because the facility had a policy that prohibited romantic partners from being in the program simultaneously. Easter's boyfriend at the time, John Yard, was in the program but had recently left it prematurely. The order stated that they are no longer a couple. Also, Easter still did not have stable employment or housing. The goal of the case continued to be reunification.
At a permanency-planning hearing held on May 24, the goal of the case continued to be reunification, and the court found that Easter was substantially complying with the case plan. Specifically, the court found that Easter was compliant with her counseling, so it gave her an additional three months to work toward reunification.
At the fifteen-month review hearing, the circuit court changed the goal of the case to adoption with termination of parental rights. The circuit court found that Easter had only partially complied with the case plan and that she was employed but still did not have a suitable home for the children. The court specifically found she had lived in multiple residences during the pendency of the case and that she had not been compliant with her counseling.
In response to the change in goal, the Department filed a petition for termination on October 16 alleging the following grounds: (1) twelve month failure to remedy ( Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(i)(a) ) (Supp. 2017); (2) subsequent factors ( Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(vii)(a) ); and (3) aggravated circumstances—little likelihood of successful reunification despite a reasonable offer of services. ( Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(ix)(a)(3)(A) ). The petition also alleged that termination was in the children's best interest.
At the termination hearing on January 17, 2019, Ashley Ryan, the family service worker assigned to the case, testified that Easter had completed inpatient drug treatment and was maintaining sobriety but was still minimally compliant with the court's orders. As of November, Ryan said Easter had attended four of thirteen counseling sessions. Ryan stated that the main thing that inhibited reunification was Easter's instability in employment and in housing. Throughout the case, it was always Easter moving in with somebody else. She was currently living with her boyfriend Donald Britton. At one point, they lived with Britton's mother and then moved in with Britton's father. Ryan opined that she did not consider Britton to be an appropriate person for the children to come home to; she noted that his employment was inconsistent like Easter's. Lastly, she mentioned the children's medical issues. When the children first went into foster care, KY, who was eleven months old, could not sit up and was on a feeding tube; the four-year-old twins were malnourished (HE had a feeding tube as well) and were not yet potty-trained. She also noted KY's hair-follicle test was positive for methamphetamine when she came into care. After being in foster care, KY is walking, the twins are fully potty trained, and none of the children have feeding tubes.
Easter testified and provided the address where she was living. She said she had the home in her possession since August 2018 but had to make repairs. She explained that the necessary repairs and she was nearly moved in at the time of the termination hearing. She said she was employed, worked thirty-six to forty-eight hours per week, and had been employed at the same place since July 2018. She acknowledged she had to take a two-month medical leave but noted that she had returned to the same position. Easter agreed that she missed counseling sessions, but she stated it was because she was on medical leave. She said her medical leave also affected her ability to get housing sooner because she had to use her housing money to pay bills while not working, which required her to live with other people until she secured her current home. Easter also testified that she and Britton would be clean if tested for drugs, that Britton had a job pouring concrete, and that they had sufficient funds between the two of them to maintain the home. Lastly, she testified that she is not current on her child support and is about $4000 in arrears.
Britton testified that he had attended every visit with Easter since they had begun their relationship in October 2017 and that he cooperated with the single drug screen the Department had given him, which was negative. He verified Easter's testimony regarding the home they had moved into and he said he has a driver's license, a vehicle, insurance, and no other children.
Following the termination hearing, the circuit court entered an order terminating Easter's parental rights on all three grounds alleged in the Department's petition and as well as the court's best-interest finding, including its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Copp v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
... ... court's best-interest finding; thus, this court is not ... required to address this issue on appeal. [ 1 ] See, ... e.g. , Easter v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs. , ... 2019 Ark.App. 441, at 8, 587 S.W.3d 604, 608 ... He ... does, however, challenge the ... this case, and any argument for special accommodations was ... not preserved for appeal. Pratt v. Ark. Dept. of Hum ... Servs. , 2012 Ark.App. 399, 413 S.W.3d 261. Finally, the ... aggravated-circumstances ground does not require DHS to prove ... that ... ...
-
Farfan v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
...termination of parental rights, we do not address the other statutory grounds found by the trial court. Easter v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs. , 2019 Ark. App. 441, 587 S.W.3d 604.VI. Best Interest Anita contends that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that termination was in the min......
-
Younger v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
...and court orders may serve as a subsequent factor on which termination of parental rights can be based. Easter v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. , 2019 Ark. App. 441, 587 S.W.3d 604. Younger was ordered to obtain stable housing and income. At the termination hearing, the court heard testimony t......
-
Thompson v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
...circuit court's best-interest finding; thus, we are not required to address this factor. See, e.g. , Easter v. Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs. , 2019 Ark. App. 441, at 8, 587 S.W.3d 604, 608. Thompson does, however, challenge the potential-harm factor. To find potential harm, "the trial court is ......