An Instance of Termination of Parental Rights
Posted on Jan 30, 2016 12:02pm PST
In January of 2015, Mother was arrested for credit card fraud and child
endangerment. Her home was found to be in a deplorable condition and unsafe
for her Son, age two years old. Because of the unsafe conditions, the
San Bernardino County Child and Family Services (CFS) requested the juvenile
court detain Son from his Mother’s home and place him in temporary
foster care. The court granted CFS’s request, and Son was placed
in a suitable foster home. (Son’s Father was imprisoned for numerous
violent felony arrests and convictions at the time, including murder,
rape, vehicle theft, burglary, spousal abuse, and drug offenses.)
Father was due to be released from prison in April of 2015. Because of
Father’s violent criminal past, CFS requested that juvenile court
also prevent Father from reunifying with Son. The CFS social worker informed
the court, that along with his violent past and frequent incarcerations,
Father rarely spent time with any of the six children he fathered with
different women. He also engaged in numerous instances of spousal abuse,
including against Mother. In another instance, Father injured his former
wife causing her to be hospitalized, and Father’s parental rights
to their child were permanently terminated after Father failed to reunify
with the child.
In April of 2015, the juvenile court terminated Father’s parental
rights, and Father appealed.
The Appellate Court agreed with the Juvenile Court. Under Section 361 of
the California Welfare and Institutions Code, a court can terminate parental
rights when a parent previously failed to reunify with the child’s
sibling or half sibling; and if the parent subsequently made no reasonable
effort to treat the problems that led to the removal of the sibling or
half sibling.
The Appellate Court quoted from a previous case in making its decision:
“If the child’s parent has suffered the previous termination
of parental rights as to a sibling or half sibling, there is the potential
that providing reunification services would be fruitless in light of the
parent’s past history.”