This issue must be resolved by the court before it may consider the best interests of the child.In re Interests of H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 531, 789 P.2d 96 (1990) (citing In re Pawling, 101 Wn.2d 392, 400, 679 P.2d 916 (1984)). The trial court made the following findings of fact, all of them undisputed on appeal. During the time Toni McGee lived with Lane Morrison, she endured mental, emotional and physical abuse. Morrison pointed a pistol at her on more than one occasion.
The threshold question under the statute is whether the parent “has failed to perform parental duties under circumstances showing a substantial lack of regard for his or her parental obligations.” RCW 26.33.120(1) ; In re H.J.P. , 114 Wash.2d 522, 531, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). The trial court must resolve this issue before it can address the child's best interest.
Natural parents possess a fundamental liberty interest, protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, in the care, custody, and management of their children. In re H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 526, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). However, parental rights have limitations.
In addition, both the United States Supreme Court and the Washington Supreme Court have held that termination of parental rights requires a showing of parental unfitness. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 760, 102 S.Ct. 1388, 71 L.Ed. 2D 599 (1982); 7 In re Interests of H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 527, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). Satisfaction of the statutory requirements establishes parental unfitness.
Any state law that would deprive a parent of that right must satisfy due process. In re H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 526-27, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). Washington's adoption statute allows for the termination of a biological parent's rights
Natural parents possess a fundamental liberty interest, protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, in the care, custody, and management of their children. In re H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 526, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). However, parental rights have limitations.
M.C. challenges the constitutionality of RCW 26.33.120(1) which, in the context of adoption, allows for termination of parental rights without consent of the biological parents. See In re Matter of H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 526, 789 P.2d 96 (1990); In re Adoption of K.M.T., 195 Wn.App. 548, 559, 381 P.3d 1210 (2016).
Accordingly, the adoption code requires that "clear, cogent, and convincing evidence" be presented to sustain an order terminating parental rights. In re H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 532, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). Under this standard of proof, the ultimate fact must be shown by evidence to be "highly probable."
The adoption code requires clear, cogent, and convincing evidence to sustain an order terminating parental rights. In re Interest of H.J.P., 114 Wn.2d 522, 532, 789 P.2d 96 (1990). Pursuant to this standard of proof, the ultimate fact in issue must be shown by evidence found to be "highly probable."
The threshold question is whether the "'parent has failed to perform parental duties under circumstances showing substantial lack of regard'" for parental obligations. McGee, 86 Wn.App. at 474 (quotation marks omitted) (quoting In re Interests of H.J.P., 114 Wn2d 522, 528, 789 P.2d 96 (1990)). The court must resolve this question before it may consider the best interests of the child.