Opinion
19-P-1021
03-06-2020
Care and Protection of URIAH.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The mother appeals from a judgment entered by a judge of the Juvenile Court finding her unfit to parent the child, and placing him in the permanent custody of the Department of Children and Families (DCF). Because we conclude that the trial judge's findings and rulings were well supported by the evidence, we affirm.
The father did not participate in the trial and did not appeal from the judgment.
Background. The child was born in 2006. He is autistic and nonverbal. The mother "was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and delusional disorder in 2009," causing "delusions about spirits and voodoo, paranoia about neighbors and other collaterals being out to get her, aggression, and obsession with using bleach." She has refused to acknowledge or treat her schizophrenia. Still, the mother "has been credited with loving her son and trying to do what is best for him" and with the ability to "effectively redirect [the child], as well as handle his behavioral and emotional issues."
"We summarize the relevant facts and procedural history from the judge's findings, supplemented by additional undisputed facts from the record." Guardianship of Kelvin, 94 Mass. App. Ct. 448, 449 (2018). We reserve some details for the discussion.
--------
The mother's mental illness prevents her from logically and calmly engaging with her son's medical providers and neighbors. The mother frequently has outbursts, has been banned from an entire medical network, has resisted sound medical advice for her son, and has shown up to his appointments without approval and upset him to the point that intervention was required. The mother's delusions and paranoia have contributed to his repeated endangerment. For example, the mother creates a hazardous home environment through her overuse of bleach, blocking of smoke detectors, exposing live wires, blocking ventilation, and leaving him unsupervised.
The mother has a long history of unstable housing related, at least in part, to her paranoid fears of people practicing voodoo hexes on her and her child. For several years, she has moved between shelters, apartments, and homelessness. Her general noncompliance with housing officials and neighbors has inhibited her from stable arrangements.
In August, 2016, the Juvenile Court judge found the child in need of care and protection. During the subsequent eleven months, the mother was offered supports from DCF including service plans, mental health treatment, and assistance with her child's health, education, and housing.
In July, 2017, two reports were filed pursuant to G. L. c. 119, § 51A, alleging the mother neglected the child. The reports alleged that she physically assaulted a maid at the hotel where she and the child lived, which the child witnessed. The mother then drove with the child for hours. A reporter called her while she was driving and she spoke about spirits and demons, while the child was heard screaming in the background. The judge did not credit the mother's denial of the assault. The judge granted DCF temporary custody of the child. The child was placed at a school that serves individuals with autism spectrum disorder (school), where he currently resides and attends school. The mother had been trying to get the child placed in such a school. On January 25, 2019, the judge found that the parents were unfit and that the child was in need of care and protection, and committed the child to the permanent custody of DCF. This appeal followed.
Discussion. The judge's subsidiary findings must "prove clearly and convincingly that the [parent is] currently unfit to provide for the welfare and best interests of [the child]." Care & Protection of Vick, 89 Mass. App. Ct. 704, 706 (2016), quoting Adoption of Quentin , 424 Mass. 882, 886 (1997). The issue is not whether the mother is a good one, or whether she loves her child. It is clear that she loves her child. The question is whether the mother's parental shortcomings "place the child at serious risk of peril from abuse, neglect, or other activity harmful to the child." Care & Protection of Bruce, 44 Mass. App. Ct. 758, 761 (1998).
The mother argues that the gains the child made in his school program that addressed his special needs were the result of his placement in an appropriate setting and not because the child was removed from her custody. The judge's findings clearly and convincingly establish that the mother is currently unfit to parent and is likely to remain so. Her untreated mental illness created untenable living situations for the child and repeatedly placed him at risk and created conflict with providers, including in the child's current school and residential placement. It is her denial of her mental illness that directly impacts her ability to provide minimally acceptable care for her son.
The mother argues it was error for the judge to find that the mother's housing instability rendered her unfit. Even if a parent obtains appropriate housing at the time of the trial, as the mother did here, the judge is "not obliged to give undue weight to that evidence." Care & Protection of Lillith, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 132, 136 (2004). See Adoption of Lorna , 46 Mass. App. Ct. 134, 143 (1999). The mother's aggression and noncompliance with housing officials and neighbors, as well as her cultural biases toward certain peoples, have precluded maintenance of stable housing arrangements. When she does retain housing, the mother maintains it inappropriately for living with the child due to her use of bleach and efforts previously described to "keep spirits away"; she also leaves the child home unsupervised.
The mother's cultural biases, prejudices, and mental illnesses also contribute to the finding of unfitness. "A mental disorder is relevant where ‘it affects the parents’ capacity to assume parental responsibility, and ability to deal with a child's special needs.'" Adoption of Rhona, 63 Mass. App. Ct. 117, 125 (2005), quoting Adoption of Frederick , 405 Mass. 1, 9 (1989).
Judgment affirmed.