Shover v. Department of Human Resources, 59605
| Decision Date | 02 September 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 59605,59605 |
| Citation | 270 S.E.2d 462,155 Ga.App. 38 |
| Parties | SHOVER v. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Ronnie C. Cohan, Arthur Sanford Vener, Atlanta, for appellant.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Carol A. Cosgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Termination of parental rights. At a hearing before the Juvenile Court of Fulton County, the court concluded that the child in question had been "virtually" abandoned even though the court did not find "legal" abandonment. The mother's transient habits, failure to provide for necessaries, failure to visit the child, the residence of the mother in a house trailer with eight people, the failure or inability of the mother to obtain some type of employment other than baby care and housekeeping, when considered all together convinced the court that the infant was deprived and without proper food, clothing and shelter, and was emotionally deprived. The court concluded that such deprivation was likely to continue and probably would not likely be remedied, resulting in serious physical or mental harm. The court ordered the mother's parental rights terminated and continued custody of the child in the Division of Family & Children Services pending adoption. The mother, Linda Shover, brings this appeal enumerating several errors. Held:
1. We reverse the order of termination. The trial court made a specific finding (by way of a comment on the record) that Mrs. Shover was a very good and very kind person who loved her children very much. The court determined that though Mrs. Shover apparently was very capable of taking care of the children of other persons, her history did not reflect that she could take care of her own. The facts developed at the hearing showed that the Department of Family & Children Services had obtained custody of the child in question in 1977 when the child was about six weeks old because the child had suffered an illness and the hospital was concerned that the parents were affording inadequate care. With the consent of the parents, the child was placed in a foster home and Mrs. Shover, for the next several months, was taught child care. Mrs. Shover then left the state with her husband (the facts reflect that the husband persuaded Mrs. Shover that his father was very ill). After several months of absence, the Department of Family & Children Services brought a petition to terminate the parental rights because of abandonment. When the Shovers protested the projected adoption of their child, that petition was dismissed. Subsequently, a second petition was brought against the father and the father's parental rights were terminated. Mrs. Shover was included in the action but the petition as to her was dismissed for lack of venue. Mrs. Shover was not allowed to visit the child after the termination petition was brought, as visits by a parent during termination proceedings are against the policy of the Department of Family & Children Services. The present termination proceedings were then brought against Mrs. Shover.
The Department of Family & Children Services offered evidence that an earlier investigation (when the petition was first brought) showed Mrs. Shover was living in a substandard home with inadequate toilet facilities (i. e., no running water) and that the residence was distinctively malodorous. Mrs. Shover was then living with a friend she had known a number of years, who was subsisting on welfare but recently had obtained employment. Mrs. Shover took care of the children and did the housework. It was further developed by Mrs. Shover that she still lived with the same family except that the friend had remarried, the new husband was employed as was the friend and the family had moved to a three-bedroom trailer with appropriate toilet facilities. It was shown that if the trailer were not believed to be adequate by the Department of Family & Children...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chancey v. Department of Human Resources
...Cox v. DHR, 151 Ga.App. 257(3), 259 S.E.2d 664 (1979); Henderson v. DHR, 152 Ga.App. 74(2), 262 S.E.2d 241 (1979); Shover v. DHR, 155 Ga.App. 38, 270 S.E.2d 462 (1980); Gardner v. Lenon, 154 Ga.App. 748, 270 S.E.2d 36 (1980). Accord In the Interest of J. C., 242 Ga. 737(1, 2), 251 S.E.2d 29......
-
H.L.T., In Interest of
...detrimental and egregious parental misconduct underlying the deprivation and probable continued deprivation.' Shover v. DHS, 155 Ga.App. 38, 40, 270 S.E.2d 462 (1981)". McCormick v. Dept. of Human Resources, 161 Ga.App. 163, 164, 288 S.E.2d 120 With this substantive standard in mind, this c......
-
M.M.A., In re
...influences or amenities in third-party custody is insufficient to justify taking him from his natural parents. Shover v. DHR, 155 Ga.App. 38, 270 S.E.2d 462 (1980). So important have our courts regarded the bond between parent and child that they have declined to sever it in instances of pa......
-
Brooks v. Carson
...influences or amenities in third-party custody is insufficient to justify taking him from his natural parents. Shover v. DHR, 155 Ga.App. 38 (270 SE2d 462) (1980). So important have our courts regarded the bond between parent and child that they have declined to sever it in instances of par......