COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Frank, Clements and Senior Judge Willis
BARBARA HARPER
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 1385-02-1 PER CURIAM
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
VIRGINIA BEACH DEPARTMENT
OF SOCIAL SERVICES
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
Thomas S. Shadrick, Judge
(Pamela S. Wilson, on brief), for appellant.
(Leslie L. Lilley, City Attorney; Paulette
Franklin-Jenkins, Assistant City Attorney, on
brief), for appellee.
(David S. Hay, on brief), Guardian ad litem
for the infant child.
Barbara Harper (mother) appeals the decision of the circuit
court terminating her residual parental rights in her daughter,
BAH (daughter). On appeal, mother contends the trial court erred
by finding (1) she failed to demonstrate good cause for her
failure to complete required programs, (2) the Department of
Social Services (the Department) offered her reasonable and
appropriate services, and (3) she failed to substantially comply
with the foster care plan. Upon reviewing the record and briefs
of the parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit.
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court.
See Rule 5A:27.
On appeal, we view the evidence and all the reasonable
inferences in the light most favorable to appellee as the party
prevailing below. See McGuire v. McGuire, 10 Va. App. 248, 250,
391 S.E.2d 344, 346 (1990).
BACKGROUND
Daughter was born on August 22, 1991 and removed from
mother's care on November 5, 1999 after mother refused to accept
safe housing from the Department and did not locate adequate
housing herself. Mother was ordered to participate in regular
visitation, obtain stable housing, find regular employment,
complete substance abuse counseling, attend individual therapy,
and participate in a battered women's group. The Department
offered mother transportation and provided services to help her
locate housing and employment. Over one year after the time
daughter was placed in foster care, mother had only completed the
substance abuse evaluation, the psychological evaluation, and had
complied with random drug screening. Mother did not complete any
of the other requirements of the service plan. The Department
subsequently changed the goal for daughter from permanent foster
care placement to adoption and sought to terminate mother's
residual parental rights.
- 2 -
ANALYSIS
"Code § 16.1-283 embodies the statutory scheme for the
termination of residual parental rights in this Commonwealth."
Lecky v. Reed, 20 Va. App. 306, 311, 456 S.E.2d 538, 540 (1995).
Subsection (C)(2), the subsection under which the trial court
terminated appellant's parental rights in this case, requires
proof, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) the
termination is in the best interests of the child, (2)
"reasonable and appropriate" services have been offered to help
the parent "substantially remedy the conditions which led to or
required continuation of the child's foster care placement," and
(3) despite those services, the parent has failed, "without good
cause," to remedy those conditions. Clear and convincing
evidence is "'that measure or degree of proof which will produce
in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or conviction as
to the allegations sought to be established.'" Martin v.
Pittsylvania County Dep't of Soc. Servs., 3 Va. App. 15, 21, 348
S.E.2d 13, 16 (1986) (quoting Gifford v. Dennis, 230 Va. 193,
198 n.1, 353 S.E.2d 371, 373 n.1 (1985)).
The evidence established that the Department had worked
with mother for over two years, offered her transportation to
required services, attempted to help her find adequate housing
and regular employment, and offered her other services and
referrals. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to
the Department, established that it made "reasonable and
- 3 -
appropriate efforts" to help appellant remedy the conditions
which both "led to" and "required continuation of" daughter's
foster care placement in 1999. Code § 16.1-283(C)(2).
Nonetheless, mother failed to make reasonable progress towards
eliminating the conditions which led to daughter's foster care
placement.
The evidence established that mother declined almost all
services offered by the Department. She did not obtain safe
housing or regular employment. She failed to complete
counseling and therapy and failed to regularly visit daughter.
Mother argues only that she was unable to remedy the situation
because of past sexual and physical abuse she endured from her
father and husband. Although a parent's limitations are factors
for the court to consider, they do not necessarily constitute
good cause for failing to remedy the conditions leading to
foster care placement. See Lecky, 20 Va. App. at 312, 456
S.E.2d at 541. Furthermore, a parent's mental problems alone do
not constitute good cause. See Lowe v. Dep't of Public Welfare,
231 Va. 277, 281, 343 S.E.2d 70, 73 (1986). "It is clearly not
in the bests interests of a child to spend a lengthy period of
time waiting to find out when, or even if, a parent will be
capable of resuming his responsibilities." Kaywood v. Halifax
County Dep't of Soc. Servs., 10 Va. App. 535, 540, 394 S.E.2d
492, 495 (1990) (citation omitted).
- 4 -
The record supports the trial court's determination that
termination was in daughter's best interests and that mother had
been either unwilling or unable to remedy those conditions which
led to daughter's placement in foster care within twelve months,
notwithstanding the significant efforts of the Department. The
requirements of Code § 16.1-283(C), indispensable to termination
of mother's parental rights, were satisfied.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial
court. See Rule 5A:27.
Affirmed.
- 5 -
Barbara Harper v. Virginia Beach Dept. Social Svc
Combined Opinion