Powell v. Department of Human Resources, 56092
| Citation | 248 S.E.2d 533,147 Ga.App. 251 |
| Decision Date | 21 September 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 56092,56092 |
| Parties | POWELL v. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Robert L. Littlefield, Jr., Decatur, for appellant.
Don A. Langham, First Asst. Atty. Gen., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Bowers, Senior Asst. Atty. Gen., Carol Atha Cosgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., A. Joseph Nardone, Jr., Brant Jackson, Jr., Anne Workman, Sol., Decatur, for appellee.
This appeal is from an order of the Juvenile Court of DeKalb County, terminating appellant's parental rights with respect to his son.
1. Appellant contends that the evidence was not sufficient to meet the standard set forth in Code Ann. § 24A-3201. That section permits the termination of parental rights if ". . . the child is a deprived child and the court finds the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue or will not be remedied and that by reason thereof the child is suffering or will probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm."
The evidence presented at the hearing was conflicting. Appellant produced evidence, though equivocal and self-contradictory, that his home situation had improved since the child was first taken from him. The evidence produced by the Department of Human Resources and psychological and psychiatric reports on appellant made a strong showing that the child's interest would be best served by the termination of appellant's parental rights. The trial court found as a fact that the child is deprived and that the conditions which caused appellant's son to be a deprived child have not been corrected and cannot be corrected in the foreseeable future.
" Banks v. Dept. of Human Resources, 141 Ga.App. 347, 350, 233 S.E.2d 449, 451.
2. Complaining that there was no showing that he was an "unfit" parent, appellant asserts that the trial court applied an incorrect standard to determine whether appellant's parental rights should be terminated. That assertion is refuted by the record which reflects that the juvenile court judge carefully controlled the proceedings to focus on the proper issues of the case, whether ". . . the child is a deprived child and . . . (whether) the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue or will not be remedied . . ." Code Ann. § 24A-3201(a)(2). The trial court clearly applied the appropriate statutory standard.
3. In four related enumerations of error, appellant argues, in essence, that the order terminating his parental rights amounted to a deprivation of due process because of an abuse of power by the Department of Human Resources. Appellant's argument, fully presented to the trial court, was bottomed on allegations that the department actively prevented him from contacting his son, that the department completely failed to work with appellant to correct the conditions contributing to his son's deprivation and that all the department's efforts with respect to his son were directed toward placing him with adoptive parents before attempting to sever appellant's parental rights and without investigating appellant's current home situation.
Appellant urges that the legal effect of the department's alleged improprieties was to render termination of his parental rights inappropriate, at least until appellant is given an opportunity with the child in his custody to demonstrate his ability to care for his son. However, appellant has not shown, nor have we found, any law requiring a trial period of parental custody preceding a termination of parental rights. Moreover, the department presented convincing evidence that the procedures followed in this case were normal and appropriate and afforded appellant due process of law. Countering ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chancey v. Department of Human Resources
...v. State of Ga., 141 Ga.App. 268, 233 S.E.2d 224 (1977); Banks v. DHR, 141 Ga.App. 347, 233 S.E.2d 449 (1977); Powell v. DHR, 147 Ga.App. 251(1), 248 S.E.2d 553 (1978). In other cases, however, the court has insisted on evidence of "profoundly detrimental and egregious parental misconduct."......
-
R.L.Y., In re
...solely with the judge, and if there is any evidence to support his findings, they will not be disturbed. Powell v. Dept. of Human Resources, 147 Ga.App. 251, 253 (248 SE2d 533) (1978).... The evidentiary standard for termination of parental rights is compelling facts to establish the necess......
-
IN RE MLP, A99A0105.
...punctuation omitted.) In the Interest of A.A.G., 146 Ga. App. 534, 535(2), 246 S.E.2d 739 (1978). See also Powell v. Dept. of Human Resources, 147 Ga.App. 251, 248 S.E.2d 533 (1978). After reviewing the trial court's order and the entire record, including transcripts of the 1996-1997 hearin......
-
In re ATH
...in termination hearings and to consider such reports to the extent of their probative value. See Powell v. Dept. of Human Resources, 147 Ga.App. 251, 253-254(4), 248 S.E.2d 533 (1978). 16. See Enchanted Valley RV Resort v. Weese, 241 Ga.App. 415, 422(3), 526 S.E.2d 124 17. See In the Intere......