Opinion
M08CP14012331A
11-05-2015
In re Jayce O. [1]
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Barbara M. Quinn, Judge Trial Referee.
On September 16, 2014, the Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families, hereafter " DCF, " filed a co-terminus petition for the termination of the parental rights of Kaitlyn J. and Louis C.P. to their child, Jayce O. Jayce was removed from his mother on an order of temporary custody on September 2014. He was adjudicated neglected on January 23, 2015, and trial on the termination petition was delayed to September 2015 to give his mother more time to rehabilitate.
The termination petition alleges that Kaitlyn J.'s rights to another child have been terminated, that this child is under the age of seven and that she has failed to rehabilitate so that she could parent this child within a reasonable period of time, given the child's age and needs. See Connecticut General Statutes § 17a-112(j)(3)(E). As to the absent father, the petition alleges that he had abandoned Jayce and had no ongoing parent child relationship with him. Connecticut General Statutes § 17a-112(j)(3)(A) and § 17a-112(j)(3)(D) respectively. Jayce's father declined to participate in the proceedings and was defaulted. Kaitlyn attended all four days of trial on September 14, 16, 17 and October 21, 2015. Her counsel vigorously defended her position and objected to the current permanency plan, consolidated with the trial for hearing. The court finds from the record that there are no other custody proceedings affecting Jayce and that it has jurisdiction. After duly considering all the evidence and for the reasons set forth in detail below, the court grants the petition and finds that it is in the best interests of Jayce O. to terminate his biological parents' rights.
The default was entered on January 23, 2015. Luis was identified as the putative father and admitted he is likely Jayce's parent, but refused to participate in any paternity testing. Paternity was established in the Superior Court for Family Matters and a judgment entered.
1. FACTS
A. The Mother, Kaitlyn J.
(1) Background and Events Leading to Jayce's Removal
Kaitlyn is now twenty-two years old. Hers is the life story of a child who fell between the cracks of two parents, too young and immature to have a child themselves. Kaitlyn lived with her father after her parents' separation when she was three. When she was out of control and using marijuana, her father would not deal with her. She then went to live with her mother at age thirteen. She apparently was not closely supervised or given proper structure or nurturing attention by either parent. She was out of control, belligerent and unwilling to follow normal parental guidelines. She recalls both parents using drugs and her observations of drug activity when she was quite young. And at age fourteen, she became pregnant herself. She followed early in the footsteps of her neglectful parents, and the next events in her life are all too common and to be expected when a child gives birth to yet another child.
She came into DCF care and her parents' rights to her were terminated. Kaitlyn was placed in a home with wrap-around services, so she could remain with her infant. Her daughter was born in January 2008, a few short months before her own fifteenth birthday. To Kaitlyn's credit, she remained in the home for over a year. But by July 2009, stability ended for Kaitlyn. Kaitlyn ran away from her placement, an order of temporary custody was granted. Her daughter was adjudicated neglected and on November 18, 2010, Kaitlyn consented to the termination of her rights to this child when she herself was just seventeen. Her daughter was adopted by her paternal grandmother and she continued to have some contact with her for a time. Kaitlyn remained in DCF care until she signed herself out at age eighteen. As noted in her DCF records at the time, Kaitlyn was resistant to treatment, engaged in substance abuse and was unable to benefit from the mental health services offered to her. Those same problems, unfortunately for her, are still with her at present time, some six years later.
After she left DCF care, Kaitlyn began a relationship with another woman and the two decided to have a child together. She reports she had sex with Jayce's father one time, for purposes of getting pregnant and Jayce was the result. In 2013, she moved with Jayce to California to be with her friend, and lived with her and her family for about a year. The family was not supportive of her and so a year later, in 2014, she returned with Jayce by herself to Connecticut and lived for a short time with her paternal aunt and uncle.
She then planned to move into an apartment with her father, and she did so, but her father never did and was not financially supportive. Due to Kaitlyn's lack of education, she is only able secure employment without significant remuneration and has had considerable difficulty in adequately supporting herself. The efforts to maintain herself and her child and lead a stable and sober lifestyle were overwhelming to her. She regularly smoked marijuana, used other drugs and led a chaotic life, leaving Jayce with different caretakers with criminal records and child protection histories while she partied. There were several DCF contacts with Kaitlyn and Jayce before the events which led to Jayce's removal.
On September 12, 2014, a day after the DCF worker had warned Kaitlyn about going to her substance abuse treatment and getting food for Jayce, the worker arrived at the home to find that Kaitlyn was out and Jayce had been left with Kaitlyn's girlfriend. Kaitlyn and her friend had had an argument the night before and her friend said that she was concerned about Jayce as Kaitlyn was very abrasive to her child. There was also no food in the home for Jayce. When Kaitlyn returned home, she was belligerent and angrily told the worker to get out of her apartment and her life. She stated that she can " see whoever she wants" and DCF cannot run her life.
An OTC was granted and Jayce was initially placed in the home of a social worker to whom Kaitlyn had been close when she herself was in DCF care. Thereafter he came into the care of his present foster parents. He has remained in their care since September 2014.
(2) Services and Rehabilitation Efforts
Many services have been provided to Kaitlyn by DCF since Jayce's removal. Specific steps in this case were ordered for her on September 16, 2014 and finalized on January 23, 2015 when Jayce was adjudicated neglected. She has not been compliant with these steps nor has she made any significant strides in addressing her continued substance use and ongoing mental health difficulties and medication needs. She fundamentally refuses to believe, despite her assertions to the contrary, that marijuana presents a problem for her. Until recently, she has consistently denied the efficacy of any medications to assist her with her deep seated mental health difficulties, including self-reported daily panic attacks lasting 20 minutes or more and significant anxiety.
Petitioner's Exhibits 4 and 5.
Kaitlyn has attended many of the services offered to her, but has failed to engage in any meaningful long-term way. She minimized her past trauma, and has made little progress in trauma-focused therapy. She remains poor at self-regulation, caring for herself emotionally or dealing competently with financial or other issues confronting her. She has attended and participated in a drug recovery programs, parenting services, as well as receiving both group and individual therapy for her mental health difficulties for some considerable time.
The list of service providers and their struggles to keep her engaged and complete the programs demonstrate the reasonable services provided to her. Her therapist and parent coach are clearly supportive of her, but frustrated. She has secured Section VIII housing, which she disparages, but nonetheless allows her reasonable accommodation, given her limited income. Due to the slow progress being made in her counseling sessions and her medication issues, intensive outpatient services were at one point recommended for her. The coordination of services for her remains a major challenge.
Kaitlyn has taken seriously her parent coaching and her time with Jayce. She and he are affectionate with each other and the child clearly has a connection to her. He is happy to see her when they are able to meet. But in many other respects, Kaitlyn continues to be dogged by the same difficulties noted in her own DCF record when she was younger. She remains resistant to treatment and change, she is easy to anger, belligerent, and immature in her responses to any demands made on her. She remains convinced she can self-medicate her mental health and other difficulties with the use of marijuana. Her inability to address her significant underlying needs and problems were highlighted in the psychological evaluation performed.
(3) The Psychological Evaluation and Update
The court appointed evaluator noted in his testimony that Kaitlyn was seen by him in March, August and September. She exhibited only a mixed level of cooperation with the process. In March, she was unwilling to stay the entire day, repeatedly distracted and both irritable and irritated and hostile. She constantly permitted interruptions by focusing on cell phone texts, despite instructions not to do so. She could not concentrate and focus and gave other things too much precedence. She was unwilling to respond to and engage with the evaluation. She would not speak with any level of openness about herself. It was apparent that topics about past emotional injury to her continued to trouble her. She insisted on leaving early so that she could attend a birthday party for her younger girlfriend, forcing her DFC worker to transport her early.
She was unwilling, the evaluator noted, to be forthcoming about the nature of her relationship with her girlfriend and much about her own inner life. She also remained unable, at that time, to psychologically understand why she was a risky parent for Jayce and that she could and did jeopardize her child's safety.
Nonetheless, given the seriousness of the DCF claims against her and the pending termination proceedings, as well as her son's connection to her, the evaluator reported that:
The mother relates very effectively to [Jayce]. He is delighted to see her and is very responsive to her. The mother is able to read him well and to anticipate his behaviors and manage them well. The mother has the capacity to develop her relationship with Jayce. In terms of parenting ability alone, she probably has the capacity to develop a satisfactory overall parenting capacity for Jayce.
Her danger most likely would come from other areas of her life, including her relationship problems, her distrust, her oppositional and defiant tendencies and her clinical difficulties. She remains at risk for substance abuse.
Evaluation Report date March 14, 2015, exhibit 9, page 20.
He recommended that she receive an additional six months in which to rehabilitate while Jayce remained in the foster home. He recommended services that Kaitlyn would need to complete for reunification to progress. They included substance abuse maintenance treatment, medical mental health treatment to address her anxiety problems and panic problems as well as to help her with her irritability and anger, anger management treatment, combined individual psychotherapy to address her psychological challenges and underlying anger, distrust, irritability and PTSD symptoms.
By early May 2015, Kaitlyn had been sober for some time and it was expected that further reunification services could begin. But testing and her own admission revealed just at this crucial time in the decision-making concerning her ability to reunify with Jayce, Kaitlyn had again begun using drugs. In addition, she became convinced that the medication she was prescribed did not help her mood. She unilaterally stopped taking those medications. She did not discuss her decision with her medication providers or seek different dosages for increased effectiveness.
For a lengthy period of time, Kaitlyn has insisted that she did not use regularly in May and instead that a second drug test proved her innocence. But the discrepancy between the DCF and other segmented hair test has to do with the manner in which the results were reported, and when the calibration was explained, each test was similar and demonstrated multiple days of marijuana use.
In August and early September, the court appointed evaluator met with Kaitlyn again. He spoke with many of her treatment providers concerning her progress. It is apparent in his report, that by late August and early September, Kaitlyn continued to deny marijuana was a problem for her. She has maintained this stance, despite the fact that her reunification efforts with Jayce were derailed by it. She is insistent that it helps her with her anxiety and she does not see why she cannot use it in that fashion.
Kaitlyn again did not fully participate in the evaluation process, and presented as before as irritable and defensive and using poor judgment, although her mood improved as time went on. She did not believe she needed medication for her anxiety, attention difficulties and to stabilize her mood. She stated she went 22 years without such drugs. " I am just under stress and I can go another 22 years without it too."
At that point in time, given all her treatment providers' reports about her very slow progress and with her continued moody, irritable oppositional behavior, her prognosis was not good. The evaluator stated that Kaitlyn:
meets some of the diagnostic criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Borderline Personality Disorder and Dysthymic Disorder . . . the mother still has strong reservations about the consumption of clinical services and the use of medications to manage her turbulent and unpredictable emotions. These attitudes can interfere with diagnostic and treatment progress.
Exhibit 10, Court Ordered Psychological Evaluation dated September 8, 2015, page 16.
He could not recommend reunification and noted that she needed at additional 8-12 months to establish an unbroken rehabilitation trajectory which has durability and a satisfactory measure of reliability. He noted that it is less risky for Jayce to have his mother's rights terminated and be free for adoption than to postpone a permanency decision so much longer. His testimony in court echoed the same strong opinion.
Exhibit 10, page 17.
(4) Current Situation
In all of the above information, it is apparent that Kaitlyn has not progressed far, despite many interventions, from the observations made about her psychological status as a teenage in DCF care. She remains significantly resistant to clinical treatment and medication to help with her intrusive anxiety and regular panic attacks, to therapeutic interventions requiring her to examine her emotions and to limiting her use of marijuana, despite her own testimony to the contrary about this. She is currently on medication which she believes does give her relief and she wishes she had received it earlier. Nonetheless, her anger and irritability and mood continue to make her a very risky parent for Jayce, despite her evident ability to connect to him.
Her parent coach is more hopeful that Kaitlyn could do better with supports in place, although the length of time for such rehabilitation was uncertain. Unfortunately, given the totality of the evidence, the court does not find this likely, given her demonstrated and persistent resistance to such supports. How much greater will be her opportunity to end such involvement when the eyes of others and the court are no longer on her? The court also concludes, from all of clear and convincing testimony and evidence in the record, that Kaitlyn is not in a position to care for her young son either now or in the foreseeable future, given Jayce's age and needs for structure, nurturing and permanency in his young life.
B. The Father, Lewis C.P.
Luis is the biological father of Jayce, but has never been in the presence of his child. He was only with Kaitlyn once and is not willing to act as a parent for Jayce. He is not interested in this child. He was defaulted at the time of Jayce's neglect adjudication in January of this year. No services were provided to him, given his refusal to participate. It is without question from the clear and convincing evidence that he has abandoned this child and has no ongoing parent child relationship with him, nor does he wish to have one.
'[A]bandonment' has been defined as a parent's " fail[ure] to maintain a reasonable degree of interest, concern or responsibility as to the welfare of the child . . . 'Maintain' implies a continuing, reasonable degree of interest, concern, or responsibility and not merely a 'sporadic showing' thereof. (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Paul M., 148 Conn.App. 654, 664, 85 A.3d 1263, cert. denied, 311 Conn. 938, 88 A.3d 550 (2014).
He has no relationship with his child nor does he wish one. As to the second ground, when the court considers whether to grant a termination on the grounds of having no ongoing parent-child relationship, the court must:
[f]irst, there must be a determination that no parent-child relationship exists, and second, the court must look into the future and determine whether it would be detrimental to the child's best interest to allow time for such a relationship to develop . . . In re Christian P., 98 Conn.App 264, 269, 907 A.2d 1261 (2006).
This child does not know his father, his father wished no relationship with him. There would be no purpose in giving him any more time, given his actions and views. As noted, this ground too has been established by the clear and convincing evidence.
C. The Child, Jayce O.
Jayce will be three in December. He has been in foster care a little over one year. He has never been in care of his father. He remains attached to his mother and enjoys visiting with her. When he came into care, he was in need of Birth to Three services as his speech was significantly delayed. He also had significant delays in his personal and social development as well as his cognitive development. He knew only a very few words and would point and grunt when he wanted something. He often grew frustrated. The Birth to Three provider noted the focus was on communication and very soon, Jayce made great progress. She worked regularly with the foster parents as well as with Kaitlyn to support this child. He now is on a more normal trajectory and his cognitive and social skills are now in the normal range. Nonetheless, he will receive services through the end of his third year, to make sure his progress is secure and solidified.
He is presently in nursery school and is doing well, after he was transitioned to a second day care program last school year. It is apparent that he needs significant structure and predictability in his life. When there are too many changes, he regresses and needs additional help, as happened this summer when he was away on vacation and then transitioned to nursery school. He is now a happy outgoing child, who does well when he has the support and structure he needs. He has done well in his present home and, as noted, is happy to see his mother regularly as well.
II. TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS
The legal issue before the court is whether DCF has proved by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights of Jayce's biological parents should be terminated.
A. Reasonable Efforts
In order to terminate parental rights, DCF must initially show by clear and convincing evidence that it " has made reasonable efforts to locate the parent and reunify the child with the parent . . . unless the court finds in this proceeding that the parent is unwilling or unable to benefit from reunification efforts, except that such a finding is not necessary if the court has determined at a hearing . . . that such efforts are not required." In this instance they were not required for Kaitlyn, due to the statutory ground under which termination is sought. They were also not required for the father, given his position and complete lack of interest and refusal to be involved. Nonetheless, during the year that this case has been pending, Kaitlyn has received considerable support and services. Unfortunately she has not been able to make the progress required to be reunited with Jayce. The court finds from the clear and convincing evidence that reasonable reunification efforts were offered to Kaitlyn.
B. Statutory Grounds for Termination
Alleged in the termination petition is that Kaitlyn's rights to another child have been terminated and that Jayce is a child that is under the age of seven that has been adjudicated neglected, and Kaitlyn has not rehabilitated so that she could care for him in a reasonable period of time. See Connecticut General Statutes § 17a-112(j)(3)(E). It is established that Kaitlyn's rights to another child were terminated when she herself was still underage. Her counsel strenuously argues that to proceed under this section of the statue is fundamentally unfair, given that Kaitlyn was then herself a DCF ward and underage. She also agreed to a termination, her counsel argues, as she believed she could continue to see that child while in her grandmother's care, as she knew she could not care for the child herself. While the court has some sympathy for this viewpoint, unfortunately the statutory framework makes no allowance for the age of the mother and her situation. Such a change would require legislative action and this court cannot interpret the statue to prohibit a termination of parental rights under the facts before it.
Also requested was another psychological evaluation update as Kaitlyn now understood the importance of being open and frank with the evaluator. She also believed it would be appropriate for her friend, Jasmine, to participate. But the time for such openness and efforts toward rehabilitation has passed. Joyce's sense of time must be so very different from that of his mother. He is in need of stability, structure and routine now, not at unspecified time in the future. Unfortunately, his mother has not been able to seize hold of those significant opportunities she has been given in the recent past to change her personal circumstances in the many ways necessary to be a parent to him. She has not been able to rehabilitate so that she could have Jayce in her care in a reasonable period of time, given his age and needs. The court so finds by clear and convincing evidence.
C. DISPOSITION
1. The Seven Statutory Criteria
The court has found by clear and convincing evidence that the necessary statutory grounds alleged by DCF for the termination of Kaitlyn J. and Luis C.P.'s parental rights to Jayce have been proven. " . . . [B]efore making a decision whether or not to terminate parental rights, " the court is mandated to consider and make written findings regarding seven factors delineated in Connecticut General Statutes § 17a-112(k)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Devon W., 124 Conn.App. 631, 648, 6 A.3d 100 (2010); In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn.App. 819, 835, 863 A.2d 720, cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938, 875 A.2d 43 (2005); In re Vanna A., 83 Conn.App. 17, 26, 847 A.2d 1073 (2004).
(1) The Timeliness, Nature, and Extent of Services Offered or Provided to the Parent and the Child by an Agency to Facilitate the Reunion of the Child With the Parent
As set forth above, the court finds that DCF offered many reasonable services to Kaitlyn. These include therapy, drug treatment and sobriety management, parent coaching, medication management, visitation and case management to secure supported housing as well as access to other services. None were offered to the father, due to his unwillingness to participate. Kaitlyn was not able to benefit from the many services to address her needs for emotional self-regulation, for addressing her past trauma or her drug use. The services offered were timely and reasonable.
(2) Whether the Department of Children and Families Has Made Reasonable Efforts to Reunite the Family Pursuant the Federal Child Welfare Act of 1980, as Amended
As noted above, DCF made reasonable efforts under the circumstances. They offered services, parent coaching and visitation on a regular basis as well as work with the Birth to Three provider.
(3) The Terms of Any Court Orders Entered Into and Agreed Upon by Any Individual or Agency and the Parent, and the Extent to Which the Parties Have Fulfilled Their Expectations
The court finds that specific steps were ordered for Kaitlyn only but there was never full compliance. Neither sobriety nor personal growth and improvement have been made by Kaitlyn, . No steps were ordered for the absent father.
(4) The Feelings and Emotional Ties of the Child With Respect to the Parents, Any Guardians of his Person and Any Person Who Has Exercised Physical Care Custody or Control of the Child For at Least One Year and With Whom the Child Has Developed Significant Emotional Ties
Jayce has feelings for his mother, no connections to his father and strong ties to his foster parents, with whom he has not yet resided for a full year, given his first placement.
(5) The Age of the Child
Jayce will be three years old in December 2015.
(6) The Effort the Parent Has Made to Adjust His Circumstances, Conduct, or Conditions to Make it in the Best Interest of the Child to Return to His Home in the Foreseeable Future Including But Not Limited (A) the Extent to Which the Parent Has Maintained Contact With the Child as Part of an Effort to Reunite the Child With the Parent Provided the Court May Give Weight to Incidental Visitations, Communications or Contributions and (B) the Maintenance of Regular Contact With the Guardian or Other Custodian of the Child
Kaitlyn has tried to adjust her circumstances and conduct, but was not able to make enough progress to be able to care for Jayce. She visited with him regularly, but given his age and needs, it is not in his best interests to return him to her care. His father has done nothing and made no effort to have this child in his care.
(7) The Extent to Which a Parent Has Been Prevented From Maintaining a Meaningful Relationship by the Unreasonable Act or Conduct of the Other Parent of the Child, or the Unreasonable Act of Any Other Person or by the Economic Circumstances of the Parent
There has been no conduct which prevented Kaitlyn from having a meaningful relationship with her son and her economic circumstances have also not hindered her.
2. Best Interests of the Child
Jayce is in need of structure, routine and predicable care and nurturing. Neither of his parents can provide such care to him. See In re Valerie D., 223 Conn. 492, 511, 613 A.2d 748 (1992) (" Our statutes and case law make it crystal clear that the determination of the child's best interest comes into play only after statutory grounds for termination of parental rights have been established by clear and convincing evidence.") In considering whether it is in Jayce's best interest to terminate his parents' rights, the court has examined multiple relevant factors including the child's interests in sustained growth, development, well-being, stability and continuity of his environment; his length of stay in foster care; the nature of his relationship with his biological parents as well as the degree and quality of contact maintained with his parents.
After considering the child's age, and the totality of circumstances, the court concludes from the clear and convincing evidence that termination of his parents' rights is in his best interests. He needs a secure and safe placement so that he can grow and mature to become a productive child and adult.
The court has further reviewed the permanency plan in support of termination and approves the plan and finds that reasonable efforts were made to effectuate the plan. The court overrules the mother's objection to the plan.
ORDERS
It is HEREBY ORDERED that the parental rights of Kaitlyn J. and Luis C.P. to Jayce O. are terminated. The Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families is hereby appointed the statutory parent for the child. The Commissioner will file, within 30 days hereof, a report as to the status of this child as required by statute and such further reports shall be timely presented to the court as required by law. Judgment may enter accordingly.