Interest of D. H.

• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Gobeil, Judge.
• Citation: 918 S.E.2d 460
• Docket Number: A24A1822,A25A0351
• Decision Date: 02 July 2025
• Parties: In the INTEREST OF D. H., et al., Children (Mother) In the Interest of D. H. et al., Children (Father).

918 S.E.3d 460

In the INTEREST OF D. H., et al., Children (Mother) In the Interest of D. H. et al., Children (Father).

A24A1822, A25A0351

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

July 2, 2025

[918 S.E.3d 463]

Terretta Frazier Jones, for Appellant in A24A1822.

Christopher Michael Carr, Jason Samuel Naunas, Bryan Keith Webb, Atlanta, Robin McCallum, Decatur, for Appellee in A24A1822.

Amber Denyse Walden, Sara Lynn Steele, for Appellant in A25A0351.

Christopher Michael Carr, Jason Samuel Naunas, Bryan Keith Webb, Atlanta, Robin McCallum, Decatur, Bailee Grace Lindeborg, for Appellee in A25A0351.

Gobeil, Judge.

The biological father (“Father”) and mother (“Mother”) of two minor brothers each appeal the juvenile court’s determination that the children are dependent as to each parent. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm in both appeals.

[1-3] As we have explained before, the juvenile court may place a minor child in the protective custody of the Department [of Family and Children Services] where the State shows, by clear and convincing evidence, that the child is a dependent child…. [O]n appeal from an order finding a child to be a dependent child, we review the juvenile court’s finding of dependency in the light most favorable to the lower court’s judgment to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the child is dependent. In making this determination we neither weigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses, but instead[, we] defer to the factual findings made by the juvenile court, bearing in mind that the juvenile court’s primary responsibility is to consider and protect the welfare of a child whose well-being is threatened.

In the Interest of S. C. S., 336 Ga. App. 236, 244-245, 784 S.E.2d 83 (2016) (citations, punctuation, and footnote omitted). So viewed, the record before us shows as follows.

As relevant to this matter, Father and Mother are parents to two boys, Dy. H., born in 2017, and Da. H., born in 2020.¹ Prior to the events giving rise to this matter, the boys were in the care and custody of Mother. However, in February 2024, Mother had an alleged “mental health breakdown,” and, following a hearing, at which Mother testified, the two boys were removed from her custody on an emergency basis. In a subsequent dependency petition, the Gwinnett County Department of Family and Children Services (“the State” or “the Department”) alleged that, in early February 2024, “[M]other had a mental health crisis wherein [she was] reported to have been in possession of a loaded firearm, led law enforcement on a high-speed chase, drove her car towards Lake Lanier, and attempted to jump into [the lake] before she was apprehended by law enforcement.” The petition further alleges that, at the time of her arrest, Mother told police officers that “the devil was trying to hurt the children[ ] and [that] she was trying to save [them].” As to Father, the petition alleged that there was “an unsubstantiated allegation of sexual abuse involving father and [Dy. H.]” and that Father had “had no contact with the children for over two years.” The Department later amended its complaint to reflect that the parents should be required to provide proof of both housing and employment.

In a subsequent two-day hearing, the juvenile court received testimony from numerous witnesses. With respect to Mother, the juvenile court heard from law enforcement that, in February 2024, the Flowery Branch Police Department received several 911 calls from a local apartment complex that a driver — later identified as Mother — had rammed the entrance gate with her vehicle, had hit another car, and was “beating” on the door of an apartment while armed with a loaded firearm. Mother apparently left the apartment complex in her vehicle, and law enforcement “put a lookout for her vehicle.”

[918 S.E.3d 464]

When police observed her vehicle and attempted to initiate a traffic stop, Mother fled; she led police on a two-to-three mile pursuit and nearly drove into Lake Lanier. When she was apprehended, Mother told the arresting officer “that she was looking for her kids” who, she claimed, were “with the devil.” Mother apparently told the arresting officer that the devil was “everywhere” and that “she was just trying to do the Lord’s work.” The arresting officer speculated that, at the time of her arrest, it was “possible” that Mother was suffering from either “mental health issues” or was “under the influence of drugs and alcohol.” Mother was ultimately charged with various felony offenses that remained pending at the time of the hearing.

The juvenile court also received testimony from Mother. She testified that she had a total of five children, two of whom are with Father. According to Mother, she and Father — along with the two children — lived together for a few years, during which time Father struck Dy. H. so hard that the child fell from his seat and caused a picture to fall from the wall.² On another occasion, Father threatened to throw Dy. H. from a window because he would not stop crying. The two parents eventually parted ways in November 2021, at which point, Mother says, Father “decided that he didn’t want to be in the boys’ life anymore.” According to Mother, Father did not have contact with the two boys, visit them, or provide financial assistance between November 2021 and August 2023; Mother reported that Father expressly told her that she could “have” Dy. H. because he did not “want to be his dad anymore.” Later, in February 2022, Mother took Dy. H. for counseling because he “started making these crazy allegations about inappropriate things that [Father] did to him.”

When asked about the February 2024 incident, Mother testified that she did not recall certain details; alternatively, she asserted her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Mother did acknowledge, however, that, after the incident, a “psychologist” from “Northeast Medical” told her that she was “having a manic episode.” Mother also testified that she was overwhelmed and exhausted “from being a mother;” that she had not been sleeping; that she had been experiencing persistent “brain fog;” that she had previously had periods of “blacking out;” and that her instability, brain fog, blackout, and the February 2024 incident were all attributable to “a piece of metal, [a] foreign object” left in her mouth after a dental procedure. Finally, Mother acknowledged that she was unemployed and that she had a history of leaving the children with family members — including her husband, mother, and brother — who had significant criminal histories.³

The juvenile court also heard testimony from an attorney who was a self-described “auntie” or “godmother” to Mother. The attorney testified that she found Mother’s parenting style to be “loving, interactive, [and] caring,” and she explained that, until the February 2024 incident, she had never known Mother to have any mental health issues. She admitted that she had advised Mother to seek counseling with a psychologist. The attorney also testified that, while she was initially impressed with Father’s parenting, “his whole attitude changed” after he “split up” with Mother; according to the attorney, Father seemed to “just shut down.” The attorney explained that Father went years without seeing his children — or helping financially — and that, when she asked Father why he was not visiting or supporting the two boys, he responded that he had decided to simply “concentrate on his career.”

As to Father, he acknowledged that, between November 2021 and February 2024, he had no contact with either Dy. H. or Da. H. other than two phone calls; Father also acknowledged that he had not attempted to reach out to the two boys through other family members, despite having had the relevant

[918 S.E.3d 465]

contact information.⁴ As for parenting the two boys, Father admitted that he “deferred” to Mother in this respect and that he had little experience raising children. Father also addressed his criminal history, testifying that he had been convicted of a sexual offense in Michigan — specifically, criminal sexual conduct in the second degree — and had been required to register as a sex offender until he successfully petitioned to have that restriction lifted in 2014.⁵ As far as his employment, Father testified that he was previously a “senior vice president” but left that position to be a stay-at-home father to Dy. H.; Father testified that he now works as a business consultant and that he makes approximately $22,000 per year. Regarding his living arrangements, Father testified that he lives with his brother and his brother’s fiancee in a two-bedroom townhouse and pays approximately $500 per month in rent.

The juvenile court also heard from a psychologist who had been treating Dy. H. for approximately two years. The psychologist testified that, during Dy. H.’s initial intake session, the child reported that “his father had put a toy car in his butt and had put fingers in his butt.” According to the psychologist, Dy. H.’s outcry was not an isolated occurrence; Dy. H. brought up the incidents during subsequent sessions and was “consistent with his statements [as] to … what his father had done”. The psychologist also testified that the child was observed exhibiting behaviors consistent with having been sexually abused, such as “humping furniture at home” and “touch[ing] his younger brother on the bottom.”⁶ Finally, the psychologist explained that Dy. H. had been diagnosed with a mood disorder and suspected sexual abuse.

The juvenile court also received testimony from an individual employed with the Georgia Counseling and Rehabilitative Services as a “transporter” and visitation supervisor. The employee testified that she transported the boys to visit with Father and that the boys were always very excited to meet with him; according to the GCRS employee, when Father was around the children, he was “very...