In re Interest of J.C., A15A1144.
Decision Date | 16 November 2015 |
Docket Number | No. A15A1144.,A15A1144. |
Citation | 779 S.E.2d 734,334 Ga.App. 526 |
Parties | In the Interest of J.C., a child. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Linda B. Taylor, Newnan, Jacqueline Couturier Cauble, Calandra Almond Harps, Samuel S. Olens, Shalen S. Nelson, for J.C., a child.
The mother of J.C. appeals from the juvenile court's March 5, 2014 order transferring temporary legal custody of the child, then one-and-a-half years old, from the mother to the child's aunt. Because there was not clear and convincing evidence that at the time of the transfer order the child was presently deprived due to the mother's parental unfitness, we reverse.
Georgia's former juvenile code applies to this case because it was commenced in 2013. See generally In the Interest of G.R.B., 330 Ga.App. 693 n. 1, 769 S.E.2d 119 (2015) ( ). The former juvenile code authorized a juvenile court to transfer temporary legal custody of a child from a parent to one of several enumerated persons or entities if the child was found to be a deprived child. Former OCGA § 15–11–55(a)(2)(A).
In the Interest of S.S., 232 Ga.App. 287, 289, 501 S.E.2d 618 (1998) (citation and punctuation omitted).
Keeping the above standards in mind, we turn to the evidence, which we view "in the light most favorable to the juvenile court's judgment to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the child was deprived." In the Interest of G.S., 279 Ga.App. at 91, 630 S.E.2d 607 (citation and punctuation omitted).
Viewed most favorably to the juvenile court's judgment, the evidence shows that J.C. was born in Baltimore on September 1, 2012, when the mother was 23 years old. Before J.C.'s birth, the mother had lived with her own mother, then moved to Baltimore where she lived at various times with her stepfather (who abused her), with a former boyfriend, with female friends, and on the streets working as a prostitute. At the time of J.C.'s birth, the mother lived in a homeless shelter. She did not know with certainty the identity of J.C.'s father but believed he could have been her stepfather.
In November 2012, the mother and J.C. moved into the house of the mother's sister ("the aunt") in Georgia. While living with the aunt, the mother engaged in some cutting behavior. Sometimes she would take J.C. across the street to spend time with neighbors whom the aunt described as "wrong people" because they fought and drank. Occasionally the aunt would see the mother drink alcohol, but she testified that the mother did not drink much. However, the mother smoked marijuana and at some point, at the mother's request, the aunt provided the mother with a urine specimen for a drug test. The mother did not get along with the aunt and planned to move back in with her own mother, but in January 2013 her mother passed away.
On March 3, 2013, the mother and DFCS agreed to an "impending danger safety plan" that did not articulate any specific safety threats but stated that J.C. would live with the aunt and the mother would have supervised visits with him at the aunt's home.
At a May 14, 2013, adjudicatory hearing the mother, acting pro se, stipulated that J.C. was deprived.1 (The appellate record does not contain a transcript of that hearing.) On June 6, 2013, the juvenile court entered the above-mentioned unappealed deprivation order that adjudicated J.C. deprived based on four causes: "Perpetration of Domestic Violence"; "Neglect/Lack of Supervision"; "Neglect/Inadequate Housing"; and "Mental/Physical Impairment of Parent." The juvenile court ruled that the mother would retain legal custody and control of J.C. provided that she "comply with the family plan devised by [DFCS2 ] and follow all recommendations and referrals to service providers, including, but not limited to: counseling recommended by [a particular service provider], parenting classes, clean and suitable housing and psychiatric evaluation[.]" The juvenile court held that the aunt would have physical custody of J.C. "until such time as the mother complies with the terms of [the juvenile court's order]" and that "[p]hysical custody of the child shall not return to the mother without prior order of this [c]ourt." The order further stated that it would "expire on May 14, 2014, unless sooner terminated by [o]rder of this [c]ourt."
The mother did not appeal from this deprivation ruling. We note, however, that the juvenile court lacked the authority to award physical custody of the child to a person other than the child's legal custodian. See In the Interest of A.N., 281 Ga. 58, 59–61, 636 S.E.2d 496 (2006) ( ); In re R.R.M.R., 169 Ga.App. 373, 374 –375(1), 312 S.E.2d 832 (1983) ( ).
Consequently, in the summer of 2013 J.C. remained living with the aunt and initially the mother lived in her truck. She briefly lived with a pimp but denied prostituting for him. She then moved into an agency-operated shelter. The mother began parenting classes and obtained employment, but in August 2013 she sustained an injury that prevented her from working.
On August 16, 2013, a licensed psychologist performed a four-hour psychological/parental fitness evaluation on the mother. The mother was very candid in their interview. She related that she was the victim of childhood sexual abuse, had a history of prostitution, and had a history of difficult relationships with abusive partners. She told the psychologist that she smoked marijuana and consumed two alcoholic drinks a day. She described a criminal history (a burglary conviction with a probated sentence and first offender status) and a history of cutting behavior as a teenager that she resumed after the argument with the aunt.
The mother told the psychologist that she had completed parenting classes and that she had begun anger management classes but had not returned because she did not like the others in the class and because the leader had said she did not need the classes. The mother appeared to the psychologist to be amenable to therapy and making an effort with it.
The psychologist administered several tests to the mother. These tests reflected that she had an IQ on the lower end of average but not low enough to mentally impair her and that she had a high probability for substance abuse and self-medication. She scored high on tests for trauma, anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation. Her score on a child abuse potential inventory reflected that she had personality characteristics in common with "people who have typically abused a child." She scored low on an inventory of parenting aspects, and although she had a reasonable understanding of child rearing and parenting principles, the mother's expressed intention of using corporal punishment rather than time-outs to discipline J.C. in the future concerned the psychologist, in light of her other test scores.
Based on his interview and the test results, the psychologist diagnosed the mother with various mental disorders that, in his opinion, affected her functioning and required immediate treatment. He recommended that J.C. not be returned to his mother's care and that she have only supervised contact with him until a therapist deemed her ready for unsupervised...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson v. Hauck
..., 270 Ga. 855, 513 S.E.2d 186 (1999) ; In Interest of M. G. W. , 341 Ga. App. 475, 801 S.E.2d 102 (2017) ; In the Interest of J. C ., 334 Ga. App. 526, 779 S.E.2d 734 (2015) ; In the Interest of S. M. B ., 319 Ga. App. 125, 735 S.E.2d 122 (2012). Because this case was initiated by the grand......
-
Mashburn v. Mashburn
...child would suffer harm if custody were returned to the parent as of the date of the final order. Cf. In the Interest of J. C. , 334 Ga. App. 526, 538 (2) (d), 779 S.E.2d 734 (2015) (in child dependency proceedings, "[e]vidence of a parent's past conduct and the possibility [that such condu......
- In re Sprayberry, A15A1616.