J.E. v. V.C.E.
Decision Date | 15 December 2006 |
Docket Number | 2050678. |
Citation | 1 So.3d 1001 |
Parties | J.E. v. V.C.E. |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Appeal from Etowah Juvenile Court (JU-06-186.01); William D. Russell, Jr., Judge.
Rodney L. Ward, Gadsden, for appellant.
John D. McCord of McCord & Martin, Gadsden, for appellee.
AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.
See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(A), Ala. R.App. P.; § 26-18-7, Ala.Code 1975; § 26-18-3(1), Ala.Code 1975; Ex parte J.W.B., 933 So.2d 1081, 1087-92 (Ala.2005); Ex parte G.C., Jr., 924 So.2d 651, 656-59 (Ala.2005); Ex parte R.E.C., 899 So.2d 272, 279 (Ala.2004); Ex parte Beasley, 564 So.2d 950, 954 (Ala.1990); Q.F. v. Madison County Dep't of Human Res., 891 So.2d 330, 335 (Ala.Civ.App.2004); S.A.B. v. Mobile County Dep't of Human Res., 845 So.2d 825, 828 (Ala.Civ.App.2002); R.K. v. R.J., 843 So.2d 774, 783-84 (Ala.Civ.App. 2002); S.W.T. v. Cullman County Dep't of Human Res., 782 So.2d 767, 770 (Ala.Civ. App.2000); T.P. v. S.P., 681 So.2d 624, 626 (Ala.Civ.App. 1996); and Matter of T.M.A., 590 So.2d 298, 299 (Ala.Civ.App.1991).
This is a parental-rights-termination case in which the mother sought to terminate the father's parental rights. When one parent seeks to terminate the parental rights of the other parent, the court need not find that the child is dependent. Ex parte Beasley, 564 So.2d 950 (Ala.1990). The court, however, is still governed by the two-pronged test outlined in Beasley: the court must find, first, that there are grounds for termination, and, second, that all viable alternatives to termination have been considered and rejected. Id.
I dissent because I do not believe that the mother proved grounds to terminate the father's parental rights. Although the father failed to regularly support the child and offered reasons for the existence of his child-support arrearage that may have suggested some degree of financial irresponsibility, there are less drastic measures to effectuate the payment of child support than terminating parental rights.
The father offered a number of reasons for his failure to visit or maintain contact with the child—most of which centered around visitation disputes with the mother, the imposition of a protection-from-abuse order against him, and the existence of a court-ordered suspension of his visitation rights. Although the trial court may have been authorized to disbelieve all of the father's reasons for failing to maintain contact with the child, the trial court was not authorized to conclude that the father had "voluntarily relinquished his parental rights" by failing to seek a reinstatement of his visitation rights.
Ex parte D.J., 645 So.2d 303, 306-07 (Ala. 1994). The evidence indicates that the father attempted to see his child when he thought visitation was allowed by law. Moreover, at trial, the father testified that he had suggested to the mother that visitation could be mediated by the paternal grandmother, a Gadsden minister and a "pillar of the community," but that the mother had arbitrarily refused.
"...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex Parte J.E.
...without an opinion. Presiding Judge Crawley filed an opinion, dissenting from the no-opinion affirmance. J.E. v. V.C.E, 1 So.3d 1001 (Ala. Civ App.2006) (Crawley, P.J., dissenting). The father then filed a petition for the writ of certiorari to this Court. This Court granted the petition. T......
- Progressive Speciality Ins. Co. v. Gore