In re S. G.
| Decision Date | 21 November 2022 |
| Docket Number | A22-0614 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: S. G. and A. E., Parents. |
| Court | Minnesota Court of Appeals |
This opinion is nonprecedential except as provided by Minn. R Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c).
Kandiyohi County District Court File No. 34-JV-22-10
Douglas D. Kluver, Kluver Law Office and Mediation Center P.L.L.C., Montevideo, Minnesota (for appellant A. E.)
Shane D. Baker, Kandiyohi County Attorney, Julianna F. Passe, Assistant County Attorney, Willmar, Minnesota (for respondent Kandiyohi County Health and Human Services)
Considered and decided by Reilly, Presiding Judge; Cochran, Judge; and Rodenberg, Judge. [*]
Appellant-father challenges a district court order terminating his parental rights to his three minor children. Because the record supports the district court's determination that a statutory ground for termination exists, the county made reasonable efforts to reunify the family, and termination is in the children's best interests, we affirm.
Appellant A.E. is the biological father of three children central to this proceeding: Child 1, born in January 2017; Child 2, born in January 2018; and Child 3, born in May 2019. The children's biological mother S.G. and father never married. Mother and father have a fourth child, born in December 2020, who is not subject to this matter.
In January 2018, Kandiyohi County Health and Human Services (the county) was notified that Child 2 tested positive for THC in his meconium at birth.[1] In October 2018, the county received further allegations that the children were exposed to marijuana use and unsanitary home conditions because of a flea infestation. In light of these reports, the county assessed the family and pursued case management.[2] The county offered mother and father voluntary services including drug testing, parent support outreach, drop-in visits, gas vouchers, transportation to medical appointments, and a referral to Nurse Family Partnership. Father participated in drug testing on only one occasion; he tested positive for THC. Father refused to submit to more drug testing claiming that he was already regularly testing to comply with the terms of his probation. But probation reported to the county that father had not submitted to drug testing for about one year.
In May 2019, mother gave birth to Child 3 whose meconium also tested positive for THC . The county received additional reports of suspected drug use and neglect, prompting the county to pursue a traditional investigation. The county petitioned in district court alleging that the children were in need of protection or services. On September 17, 2019, the county removed the children from the home and placed them in foster care because of concerns about mother's and father's drug use, erratic behaviors, and conditions of the home. Upon health assessment, the county discovered that hair follicle testing on all the children tested positive for exposure to methamphetamine. A psychologist diagnosed Child 1 with post-traumatic stress disorder and a deprivation and maltreatment disorder. Child 2 was diagnosed with a deprivation and maltreatment disorder. At the time of the children's removal from the home, father was incarcerated following a conviction for driving while intoxicated. The county did not consider him a placement option. Father was later released.
The county provided services to mother and father. Particular to father, the county provided drug testing, a referral for a chemical use assessment, safety planning, and a referral to individual therapy. Father's safety plan specified that if he were to relapse and use drugs, he must go back to chemical dependency treatment. Father also participated in a parenting assessment conducted by a psychologist in March 2020 to identify psychological issues that would impact father's parenting. The psychologist diagnosed father with major depressive disorder, antisocial personality disorder, and a substance use disorder related to marijuana and alcohol. The psychologist recommended that father maintain sobriety for a year, remain law abiding, submit to drug testing and chemical dependency treatment, pursue individual therapy, and participate in supervised visitation and parenting classes. Father attended sessions with a therapist to manage his anxiety and stress related to the CHIPS case until April 2021.
Over time, father and mother demonstrated sobriety, completed safety meetings, attended therapy appointments, and demonstrated in-home parenting skills. After a successful period of trial home visits, the children were reunited with father and mother and the district court closed the court file in June 2021.
In November 2021, father's relationship with mother deteriorated and he left mother's home. Father later admitted to using methamphetamine on at least one occasion and did not seek treatment afterward, characterizing his drug use as a single "lapse." Despite not living with the family, father established a routine of stopping at mother's home to clean and check on the children.
In December 2021, the county received reports that mother was using methamphetamine, marijuana, and pain medication. And in January 2022, law enforcement conducted a "trash pull" at mother's home and discovered methamphetamine paraphernalia. Officers executed a search warrant on the property and discovered drug paraphernalia, including a marijuana pipe in mother's bedroom near the youngest child and in plain view. At the time, father was inside mother's home sleeping on the couch with two of the children. The officers arrested mother and father and removed the children from the home.[3] Prior to foster care placement, the county again evaluated the children's health. Hair follicle testing again revealed that all three children tested positive for methamphetamine exposure; Child 3 was fighting pneumonia; Child 2 had an ear infection; and finally, Child 2 and Child 3 both had iron deficiencies.
Following his arrest, father submitted to a drug test that was positive for THC. While in jail, father reported to the county that he had last used methamphetamine six months before. The county asked father to submit to a hair follicle test to confirm his account.[4] But father shaved his head, making it impossible for the county to complete the test. The county created an out-of-home placement plan for father with goals that included not possessing or using mood altering substances, complying with drug testing, completing a chemical use assessment, obtaining safe and stable housing, and obtaining or maintaining employment. The county provided father a chemical use assessment, drug testing, gas vouchers, and supervised visits with the children.
Petition to Terminate Parental Rights (TPR)
On January 18, 2022, the county petitioned the district court to involuntarily terminate the parental rights of mother and father to the children. The county alleged two statutory grounds to support termination: (1) palpable unfitness to parent; and (2) failure to correct the conditions that led to the children's out-of-home placement. See Minn. Stat. § 260C.301, subd. 1(b)(4), (5) (2020). In February 2022, mother voluntarily terminated her parental rights to the children.
In March 2022, the district court held a three-day court trial on the petition to terminate father's parental rights. The district court heard testimony from father, the county's social worker, the county's child protection specialist, the county's case manager, a clinical social worker, the officer that executed the January 13 search warrant on mother's home, a family therapist, the children's psychologist, father's former therapist the psychologist who performed father's parenting assessment, two of father's drug and alcohol counselors at Divine Hope Counseling, the guardian adlitem (the GAL), and mother.
At trial, father testified that he considered himself a recovering addict, with alcohol and marijuana as his substances of choice. Before his arrest on January 13, father explained that he was at mother's home, checking on the children and the house, because mother t o l d him that the county was involved with the children again and father knew mother had been using drugs. Father testified that when he spoke with mother on January 13, he did not see any drug paraphernalia. Father admitted that he shaved his head to avoid completing the county's hair follicle test because of his "lapse" in November 2021 when he used methamphetamine. He acknowledged that when the district court closed the first child protection case, he agreed to a safety plan which required him to attend chemical dependency treatment after drug use. But he explained that he did not go to treatment because it was a singular "lapse" or "slip," rather than a "relapse."
Father also testified that he considered himself homeless and without a permanent address. At the time of trial, father was residing with the children's grandmother but stated that he could not remain there. If the children were returned to him, father testified he planned to make an arrangement with mother's landlord to take over the lease on her home, but was having trouble determining if he qualified for the program that allowed mother to secure a rental subsidy voucher to afford the lease.[5] Father stated the longest period of employment he held lasted one year and past criminal convictions made it difficult for him to find a job. Father was terminated from his employment following his arrest on January 13. Father testified that he obtained a part-time job two weeks before...
To continue reading
Request your trial