In re M.E.T.

2 Citing cases

  1. In re Tiffany B.

    No. E2020-00854-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 11, 2021)   Cited 3 times

    Considering the foregoing in toto, we agree with the trial court that "the combined weight of all of these factors amount[s] to clear and convincing evidence that termination [of Father's parental rights] is in the [C]hild's best interests." Particularly compelling in this case is the fact that the Child has never lived in any home other than Petitioners', see In re M.E.T., No. W2016-00682-COA-R3-PT, 2016 WL 6962306, at *10 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2016), and that the Child would more than likely be placed in an unhealthy and unsafe physical environment if Father gained custody. Although we feel the utmost sympathy for Father's situation, we are required to consider best interests from the Child's perspective, rather than Father's.

  2. In re Scarlet W.

    No. W2020-00999-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 15, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    See, e.g., In re Haskel S., No. M2019-02256-COA-R3-PT, 2020 WL 6780265, at *13 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 18, 2020) (ultimately concluding that termination of father's rights was in child's best interest when child was in stable, pre-adoptive home and called foster parents "mom" and "dad"); In re M.E.T., No. W2016-00682-COA-R3-PT, 2016 WL 6962306, at *10 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2016) (noting that the factor regarding the child's current placement was "compelling" in that case because of the length of time the child had been with his foster family and his profound bond with them). Here, we agree with the trial court that Mother's lengthy prison sentence and the success of the children's current placement militate heavily in favor of termination.