State, Dept. Ch. S. v. Whaley

18 Citing cases

  1. In re Kamdyn H.

    No. E2023-00497-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2024)

    The relevant inquiry is whether clear and convincing evidence establishes that "the parent of the child is incompetent to adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." In re Jayda J., No. M2020-01309-COA-R3-PT, 2021 WL 3076770, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 21, 2021) (quoting State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002)). A finding of mental incompetence does not require a condition that is untreatable.

  2. In re Marterrio H.

    No. W2016-01273-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 12, 2017)   Cited 2 times
    Holding that an argument raised by a parent was waived because mother did not raise an objection at trial

    First, a court must determine by clear and convincing evidence that at least one of the statutory grounds for termination exists. Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(c); State Dept. of Children's Servs. v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *9 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002). After a court makes this determination, a court must find by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the best interest of the child.

  3. In re Cartier H.

    No. M2022-01576-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2023)   Cited 11 times
    Explaining that the "failure to submit sufficient proof as to a factor does not necessarily mean that the factor is inapplicable"

    " State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002), no appl. perm. appeal filed. This Court has affirmed this ground, in one instance, where the parent "functioned in such a low range that no amount of training, education, or counseling 'could bring him up to the level where he could parent these children.'"

  4. In re B.D.M.

    No. E2022-00557-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 2023)   Cited 4 times

    The relevant inquiry is whether clear and convincing evidence establishes that "the parent of the child is incompetent to adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." In re Jayda J., No. M2020-01309-COA-R3-PT, 2021 WL 3076770, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 21, 2021) (quoting State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002)). A finding of mental incompetence does not require a condition that is untreatable.

  5. In re Joseph D.

    No. M2021-01537-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 10, 2022)   Cited 5 times

    [t]he standard for this issue has been described as inquiring as to whether "by clear and convincing evidence [ ] the parent of the child is incompetent to adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002), no appl. perm. appeal filed. This Court has affirmed this ground, in one instance, where the parent "functioned in such a low range that no amount of training, education, or counseling 'could bring him up to the level where he could parent these children.'"

  6. In re Khalil J.

    No. M2021-00908-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. May. 16, 2022)   Cited 2 times

    adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002), no appl. perm. appeal filed.

  7. In re Cyric W.

    No. M2021-00410-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 13, 2021)   Cited 2 times

    [t]he standard for this issue has been described as inquiring as to whether "by clear and convincing evidence [ ] the parent of the child is incompetent to adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002), no appl. perm. appeal filed. This Court has affirmed this ground, in one instance, where the parent "functioned in such a low range that no amount of training, education, or counseling 'could bring him up to the level where he could parent these children.'"

  8. In re Austin W.

    No. M2020-01315-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 3, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    This court has repeatedly recognized that the statutory grounds for termination of parental rights listed in Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(g) are all examples of parental conduct and situations that render a parent unfit or pose a risk of substantial harm to the welfare of a child. White v. Moody, 171 S.W.3d 187, 192-93 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004); In re C.D.C., Jr., No. E2003-01832-COA-R3-PT, 2004 WL 1243994, at *8 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 7, 2004) (No Tenn. R. App. P. 11 application filed); State Dep't of Children's Servs. v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *9 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002) (No Tenn. R. App. P. 11 application filed); State Dep't of Children's Servs. v. C.S.M., No. E2000-02806-COA-R3-JV, 2002 WL 385870, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Mar. 13, 2002) perm. app. denied (Tenn. Sept. 16, 2002); Ray v. Ray, 83 S.W.3d 726, 732 n.7 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).

  9. In re Jayda J.

    No. M2020-01309-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2021)   Cited 20 times

    [t]he standard for this issue has been described as inquiring as to whether "by clear and convincing evidence [] the parent of the child is incompetent to adequately provide care and supervision because the parent's mental condition is so impaired and likely to remain so that it is unlikely that the parent will be able to assume care and responsibility for the child in the future." State Dept. of Children's Services v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002), no appl. perm. appeal filed. This Court has affirmed this ground, in one instance, where the parent "functioned in such a low range that no amount of training, education, or counseling 'could bring him up to the level where he could parent these children.'"

  10. In re Ayden S.

    No. M2017-01185-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. May. 31, 2018)   Cited 83 times
    Holding that the petitioner must prove both an inability and unwillingness to assume custody or financial responsibility of a child

    Although inadequate parenting skills may, under some circumstances, constitute a condition that would cause a child to be subjected to further abuse or neglect and thus prevent the child's safe return to the care of the parent, DCS's proof fell short in this regard. Compare State Dep't of Children's Servs. v. Whaley, No. E2001-00765-COA-R3-CV, 2002 WL 1116430, at *12-14 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 30, 2002) (holding the evidence was not clear and convincing that mother was unable to care for her son despite, among other things, mother was unable to comfort her son, had to be reminded to check his diaper, and became frustrated with and did not know how to react to a tantrum, and noting that mother "ha[d] never harmed her child and d[id] not pose any threat to him"), with Dep't of Human Servs. v. Adams, No. 03A01-9403-CV-00114, 1994 WL 579911, at *9 & n.9 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 24, 1994) (holding that the parents were "incapable of responsible parenting" because the children lived in "a cold and drafty house," were allowed to play outside for long periods of time in extremely cold weather, and were not fed, bathed, nor medicated properly). Based on this record, we conclude the evidence was less than clear and convincing that the conditions which led to the children's removal or other conditions that in all reasonable probability would cause the children to be subjected to further abuse or n