State ex rel. State Office for Services to Children & Families v. Frazier
Decision Date | 25 February 1998 |
Citation | 955 P.2d 272,152 Or.App. 568 |
Parties | In the Matter of Rose Marie Frazier, a Child. STATE ex rel. STATE OFFICE FOR SERVICES TO CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Respondent, v. Gary FRAZIER and Glenda Kolacki, Appellants. In the Matter of Faith Ann Sparks, a Child. STATE ex rel. STATE OFFICE FOR SERVICES TO CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Respondent, v. Gary FRAZIER and Glenda Kolacki, Appellants. 95-040; 96-294; CA A95571 (Control); CA A95582. . * |
Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
George W. Kelly, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant Gary Frazier.
Terrance P. Gough, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant Glenda Kolacki.
Erika L. Hadlock, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.
Mother and father appeal from a judgment terminating their parental rights to their two daughters. ORS 419B.500 (1995). On de novo review, ORS 419A.200(5), we affirm.
To terminate parental rights, the evidence in favor of termination must be clear and convincing. ORS 419B.521 (1995). In determining whether the state has met its burden of proof for termination under ORS 419B.504, (1995) 1 the court must consider all of the factors listed in that statute and any other relevant considerations. See State ex rel. Children's Services Division v. Payne, 323 Or. 1, 4, 912 P.2d 904 (1996) (Graber, J., dissenting) (); see also State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. Boren, 105 Or.App. 599, 607-08, 806 P.2d 149 (1991) ( ). 2 We give "considerable weight" to the trial court's findings on issues of credibility, due to the court's ability to see and hear the witnesses. State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. Geist, 310 Or. 176, 194, 796 P.2d 1193 (1990). However, because our review is de novo, we must independently assess and evaluate the evidence. Boren, 105 Or.App. at 601, 806 P.2d 149.
Here, the trial court concluded that the state had met its burden to terminate the parental rights of both mother and father based on emotional illness, mental illness or mental deficiency of such a nature and duration as to render them incapable of providing proper care for these children for extended periods of time. The court also concluded that due to the parents' lack of effort to adjust their circumstances, conduct, or conditions to make the return of the children possible and their failure to effect a lasting adjustment after reasonable efforts by available social agencies for such extended duration of time that it appears reasonable that no lasting adjustment can be effected under ORS 419B.504(1) and (5). The trial court explained its conclusions:
We will first address father's argument that the trial court erred in terminating his parental rights. The petition for termination alleged that father's parental rights as to Rose 3 should be terminated on the following grounds:
We agree with the trial court that the state proved by clear and convincing evidence that father is unfit on the ground that he suffers from mental deficiencies that render him incapable of providing proper care for the children and that due to lack of effort to adjust his circumstances, conduct, or conditions to make the return of the children possible and his failure to effect a lasting adjustment after reasonable efforts by available social agencies that no lasting adjustment can be made. ORS 419B.504(1) and (5).
The evidence supporting our conclusion is as follows. At the time of trial, September 1996, mother was 21 and father was 51 years old. They are not married, but they began living together when mother was 18. Mother was sexually abused throughout her childhood by her mother's boyfriends. Father told a caseworker that he befriended mother and took her in to get her away from sexual abuse perpetrated by her mother's current boyfriend. Mother and father's first child, Rose, was born in April 1994. She was taken from them in January 1995. Faith was born in May 1996. The state immediately petitioned for termination of mother's parental rights as to Faith and obtained a warrant to seize her from mother. The state located and removed Faith from mother about three weeks before trial. Sometime during the period that father and mother lived together, father suffered a stroke. Mother and father separated for a period of time after Rose was removed. As of the time of the trial, they were once again living together.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dep't of Human Serv. v. D.M.T.
...ex rel. Dept. of Human Services v. R.O.W., 215 Or.App. 83, 99, 168 P.3d 322 (2007) (quoting243 P.3d 850State ex rel. SOSCF v. Frazier, 152 Or.App. 568, 582, 955 P.2d 272, rev. den., 327 Or. 305, 966 P.2d 220 (1998)) (brackets in R.O.W.). As previously mentioned, evidence is clear and convin......
-
Dep't of Human Servs. v. T.S. (In re T.S.)
...circumstances.” State ex rel. Juv. Dept. v. Williams, 204 Or.App. 496, 506, 130 P.3d 801 (2006) (citing State ex rel. SOSCF v. Frazier, 152 Or.App. 568, 582, 955 P.2d 272, rev. den., 327 Or. 305, 966 P.2d 220 (1998) ) (internal quotation marks omitted). In making a reasonable efforts determ......
-
State ex rel. SOSCF v. Mellor
...the parent is diagnosed with mental or emotional problems that make the affected individual unfit to parent. State ex rel. SOSCF v. Frazier, 152 Or.App. 568, 600, 955 P.2d 272,rev. den. 327 Or. 305, 966 P.2d 220 (1998). There is clear and convincing evidence in this record that mother and f......
-
State ex rel. SOSCF v. Wilcox
...demonstrate that the children's reintegration into mother's home is improbable in the foreseeable future. State ex rel. SOSCF v. Frazier, 152 Or.App. 568, 598, 955 P.2d 272,rev. den. 327 Or. 305, 966 P.2d 220 (1998) (emphasis in original). The Oregon Supreme Court has explained that, under ......