In re Mother

• Decision Date: 15 June 2015
• Docket Number: J-S25029-15,No. 2074 WDA 2014,2074 WDA 2014
• Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court
• Parties: IN RE: C.D., A MINOR APPEAL OF: B.D., NATURAL MOTHER

IN RE: C.D., A MINOR APPEAL OF: B.D., NATURAL MOTHER

J-S25029-15

No. 2074 WDA 2014

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JUNE 15, 2015

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Decree entered December 2, 2014, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Orphans' Court, at No: TPR 024-14

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., STABILE, and PLATT,^* JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.:

B.D. (Mother) appeals from the decree entered December 2, 2014, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, which involuntarily terminated her parental rights to her minor son, C.D. (Child), born in April of 2006.¹ We affirm.

Child first entered the care of the Allegheny County Office of Children, Youth and Families (CYF) on April 24, 2012. Child was placed in care as a result of an incident during which Mother called the police and reported that Child was missing, when in fact Mother had simply failed to pick up Child after school. Mother was under the influence at the time of this incident. Child was adjudicated dependent on May 15, 2012. On December 24, 2012, Child was returned to Mother's care, after Mother successfully producedthree clean urine screens. However, Child was again removed from Mother on April 26, 2013, after Mother was arrested and incarcerated.

On February 10, 2014, CYF filed a petition to involuntarily terminate Mother's parental rights to Child. A termination hearing was held on August 8, 2014, and October 31, 2014. During the hearing, the orphans' court heard the testimony of CYF caseworker, Rhianna Diana; psychologist, Terry O'Hara; Ms. Regina Harris, who transported Child to his visits with Father and supervised the visits; Father; Child's paternal grandmother, C.S.; and Mother. On December 2, 2014, the court entered its decree terminating Mother's rights. Mother timely filed a notice of appeal on December 23, 2014, along with a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal.

Mother now raises the following issue for our review. "Did the [orphans'] court abuse its discretion and/or err as a matter of law in concluding that termination of [Mother's] parental rights would serve the needs and welfare of the child pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.[A.] §[]2511(b)?" Mother's brief at 5.

We consider Mother's claim mindful of our well-settled standard of review.

The standard of review in termination of parental rights cases requires appellate courts to accept the findings of fact and credibility determinations of the trial court if they are supported by the record. If the factual findings are supported, appellate courts review to determine if the trial court made an error of law or abused its discretion. A decision may be reversed for an abuse of discretion only upon demonstration of manifest unreasonableness, partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will. The trialcourt's decision, however, should not be reversed merely because the record would support a different result. We have previously emphasized our deference to trial courts that often have first-hand observations of the parties spanning multiple hearings.

In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251, 267 (Pa. 2013) (citations and quotation marks omitted).

Termination of parental rights is governed by Section 2511 of the Adoption Act, 23 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 2101-2938, which requires a bifurcated analysis.

Initially, the focus is on the conduct of the parent. The party seeking termination must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the parent's conduct satisfies the statutory grounds for termination delineated in Section 2511(a). Only if the court determines that the parent's conduct warrants termination of his or her parental rights does the court engage in the second part of the analysis pursuant to Section 2511(b): determination of the needs and welfare of the child under the standard of best interests of the child. One major aspect of the needs and welfare analysis concerns the nature and status of the emotional bond between parent and child, with close attention paid to the effect on the child of permanently severing any such bond.

In re L.M., 923 A.2d 505, 511 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citations omitted).

In this case, the trial court terminated Mother's parental rights pursuant to Sections 2511(a)(2), (5), and (b), which provide as follows.

(a) General rule.--The rights of a parent in regard to a child may be terminated after a petition filed on any of the following grounds:

***

(2) The repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal of the parent has caused the childto be without essential parental care, control or subsistence necessary for his physical or mental well-being and the conditions and causes of the incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal cannot or will not be remedied by the parent.

***

(5) The child has been removed from the care of the parent by the court or under a voluntary agreement with an agency for a period of at least six months, the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child continue to exist, the parent cannot or will not remedy those conditions within a reasonable period of time, the services or assistance reasonably available to the parent are not likely to remedy the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child within a reasonable period of time and termination of the parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child.

***

(b) Other considerations.--The court in terminating the rights of a parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare of the child. The rights of a parent shall not be terminated solely on the basis of environmental factors such as inadequate housing, furnishings, income, clothing and medical care if found to be beyond the control of the parent. With respect to any petition filed pursuant to subsection (a)(1), (6) or (8), the court shall not consider any efforts by the parent to remedy the conditions described therein which are first initiated subsequent to the giving of notice of the filing of the petition.

23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(2), (5), and (b).

Instantly, Mother concedes that CYF presented clear and convincing evidence that her parental rights may be terminated pursuant to Section 2511(a). Mother's brief at 10 ("CYF, the petitioner, did clearly and convincingly establish threshold grounds for termination pursuant to 23Pa.C.S.[A.] §[]2511(a)(2)."). Thus, we need only consider whether the court abused its discretion by terminating Mother's parental rights pursuant to Section 2511(b).² We have discussed our analysis under Section 2511(b) as follows.

Section 2511(b) focuses on whether termination of parental rights would best serve the developmental, physical, and emotional needs and welfare of the child. As this Court has explained, Section 2511(b) does not explicitly require a bonding analysis and the term 'bond' is not defined in the Adoption Act. Case law, however, provides that analysis of the emotional bond, if any, between parent and child is a factor to be considered as part of our analysis. While a parent's emotional bond with his or her child is a major aspect of the subsection 2511(b) best-interest analysis, it is nonetheless only one of many factors to be considered by the court when determining what is in the best interest of the child.

[I]n addition to a bond examination, the trial court can equally emphasize the safety needs of the child, and should also consider the intangibles, such as the love, comfort, security, and stability the child might have with the foster parent. Additionally, this Court stated that the trial court should consider the importance of continuity of relationships and whether any existing parent-child bond can be severed without detrimental effects on the child.

In re Adoption of C.D.R., 111 A.3d 1212, 1219 (Pa. Super. 2015) (quoting In re N.A.M., 33 A.3d 95, 103 (Pa. Super. 2011)) (quotation marks and citations omitted).

In this case, the orphans' court concluded that termination of Mother's parental rights would best serve Child's needs and welfare. The court stated that it considered the nature and the status of the bond between Mother and Child, and the effects of severing that bond. Orphans' Court Opinion, 1/30/15, at 15. The court noted testimony that Child suffers from anxiety and symptoms of depression, and that these issues are directly influenced by Child's experiences with Mother. Id. In contrast, the court observed that Child is doing well in foster care. Id. at 16. The court also emphasized that Mother has failed to remedy her substance abuse issues. Id. at 15.

Mother argues that the court failed to address the impact that terminating her parental rights would have on Child, and instead focused improperly on her failings as a parent. Mother's brief at 9, 13-14. Mother also contends that the court was not permitted to consider Child's preference for residing with his foster mother when rendering its decision. Id. at 9, 13.

After a thorough review of the record in this matter, we conclude that the orphans' court did not abuse its discretion by involuntarily terminatingMother's parental rights to Child. During the termination hearing, caseworker Rhianna Diana testified concerning Mother's lengthy involvement with CYF. Ms. Diana explained that, at the time Child first was placed in care, Mother reported attending Narcotics Anonymous and Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, as well as seeing a therapist for mental health treatment and drug and alcohol treatment. N.T., 8/8/14, at 44. Mother also was in a Suboxone maintenance program "for a period of time." Id. at 43. After Child was returned to Mother's care in December of 2012, Mother reported that she was continuing to receive this treatment. Id. at 46, 49.

However, Ms. Diana further testified that Mother was detained by police for retail theft on April 19, 2013. Id. at 50-51. Ms. Diana spoke to Mother about this incident, and Mother admitted to continued drug use. Id. at 51. As noted supra, Child was removed from Mother's care a...