From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Nathan

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.
Jul 10, 2017
91 Mass. App. Ct. 1131 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017)

Opinion

16-P-1280

07-10-2017

ADOPTION OF NATHAN (and two companion cases ).


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28

The mother appeals from decrees issued by a judge of the Juvenile Court terminating her parental rights to three of her children. The mother contends that, contrary to the judge's findings, there was no properly admitted evidence of her mental health issues. The mother also contends that even assuming, arguendo, that she had mental health and drug issues, there was no nexus shown between these issues and her alleged inability to parent the children. Finally, the mother contends that any evidence of domestic violence and housing instability was stale by the time of trial. We affirm.

Before granting a petition terminating a parent's legal rights, "[t]he judge must find by clear and convincing evidence that a parent is presently unfit to provide for the welfare and best interests of the child." Adoption of Mary, 414 Mass. 705, 710 (1993). See Adoption of Rhona, 63 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 124 (2005). Upon review, "our task is not to decide whether we ... would have made the same decision, but to determine whether the trial judge abused his discretion or committed a clear error of law." Adoption of Hugo, 428 Mass. 219, 225 (1998), cert. denied sub nom. Hugo P. v. George P., 526 U.S. 1034 (1999). "In recognition of the trial judge's superior position to evaluate witness credibility and weigh the evidence, we review [his] findings with substantial deference." Adoption of Cadence, 81 Mass. App. Ct. 162, 166 (2012). "Parental unfitness must be determined by taking into consideration a parent's character, temperament, conduct, and capacity to provide for the child in the same context with the child's particular needs, affections, and age." Adoption of Mary, supra at 711.

If a parent is found unfit, the judge must determine "whether the child's best interests will be served by terminating the legal relation between parent and child." Adoption of Ilona, 459 Mass. 53, 59 (2011). "Because childhood is fleeting, a parent's unfitness is not temporary if it is reasonably likely to continue for a prolonged or indeterminate period." Id. at 60. A hope, alone, that the parent will become fit at some point in the future is insufficient to meet the standard. Id. at 59. In making this decision, the judge may properly take into account "prognostic evidence derived from an ongoing pattern of parental neglect or misconduct." Custody of a Minor (No. 1), 377 Mass. 876, 883 (1979). A parent is not entitled to "an indefinite opportunity for reform." Adoption of Cadence, supra at 169.

In this case, the judge made extensive findings which led to her conclusion that the mother was unfit and that the children's best interests would be served by terminating her parental rights. We conclude that the judge's ultimate conclusion was neither erroneous nor an abuse of her discretion.

While the mother did eventually end her relationship involving domestic violence and obtain stable housing, her persistent, debilitating, and untreated mental health issues would have placed the children at risk of neglect if they were to be returned to her custody. See Adoption of Frederick, 405 Mass. 1, 9 (1989) ; Care & Protection of Laura, 414 Mass. 788, 790-791 (1993). The judge found:

"Mother is diagnosed with bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder. Although she has been prescribed Wellbutrin and Adderall in the past, she has not taken any psychiatric medication since before [her first child] was born. Mother acknowledges that she has bipolar disorder, but testified that it was never an issue unless someone triggers her."

Evidence of the adverse impacts of the mother's untreated mental health issues permeates the trial record and the judge's findings. The mother had numerous outbursts of anger in which she verbally attacked the children, family members, and Department of Children and Families (department) staff. She was often despairing and suicidal. The evidence indicated that she was overwhelmed by the everyday tasks of parenting, and she could not sufficiently focus in order to confirm visits with the children or attend them regularly. See Guardianship of a Minor, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 392, 396 (1973). Her emotional instability and her inability to control her agitation were on full display during the trial. In addition, within two weeks of commencing the termination trial, the mother voluntarily relinquished custody of two of her other children, not subject to this petition, to the department because of intense feelings of being overwhelmed and after making reference to her own death.

Despite these issues, the mother refused to engage in department-offered services or to complete service plan tasks. The mother also refused to undergo medical or medication evaluations. She never completed a neuropsychological evaluation, never engaged in counselling, and only inconsistently attended therapy. See Adoption of Carla, 416 Mass. 510, 519 (1993). The evidence, as reflected in the judge's findings of fact, established a clear nexus between the mother's mental health issues and her inability to parent her children. Adoption of Quentin, 424 Mass. 882, 888 (1997).

Finally, the judge's detailed findings of mother's mental health issues, their impact on the children, late and missed visitations, violent and disruptive outbursts, failure to utilize department services or evaluations and her homelessness provided by clear and convincing evidence that she was currently unfit to further the welfare and best interests of her children. See Adoption of Gregory, 434 Mass. 117, 126-127 (2001). Additionally, the judge found that all these issues that formed the basis of her current unfitness determination are persuasive and are likely to continue in the future. See Adoption of Elena, 446 Mass. 24, 31-32 (2006). See also Adoption of Gillian, 63 Mass. App. Ct. 398, 404 (2005).

Decrees affirmed.

Adoption of Peter and Adoption of Jane. The children's names are pseudonyms.


Summaries of

In re Nathan

Appeals Court of Massachusetts.
Jul 10, 2017
91 Mass. App. Ct. 1131 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017)
Case details for

In re Nathan

Case Details

Full title:ADOPTION OF NATHAN (and two companion cases ).

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

Date published: Jul 10, 2017

Citations

91 Mass. App. Ct. 1131 (Mass. App. Ct. 2017)
87 N.E.3d 113