COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Annunziata, Agee and Senior Judge Coleman
HOLLY WOODALL
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 0483-01-2 PER CURIAM
AUGUST 14, 2001
FREDERICKSBURG DEPARTMENT
OF SOCIAL SERVICES
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF FREDERICKSBURG
John W. Scott, Jr., Judge
(Donald R. Skinker, on brief), for appellant.
(Joseph A. Vance, IV, on brief), for
appellee.
Holly Woodall (mother) appeals the decision of the circuit
court terminating her residual parental rights in her son,
Christopher B. Woodall. On appeal, mother contends that the trial
court erred in finding that (1) the conditions resulting in
neglect were not likely to be corrected or eliminated within a
reasonable time, and (2) mother was without good cause for her
failure to remedy substantially the conditions that led to foster
care placement within a reasonable time. Mother asks that the
judgment of the trial court be reversed and her parental rights
restored. Upon reviewing the record and briefs of the parties, we
* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not
designated for publication.
conclude that this appeal is without merit. 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
Christopher was born on August 12, 1998. On October 1, 1999,
after a finding of neglect, the juvenile and domestic relations
district court removed him from mother and awarded custody to the
Department of Social Services (the Department). On December 16,
1999, the court approved a foster care plan with a program goal of
"return to home." Under this plan, mother was required to
complete substance abuse treatment, parenting classes, a domestic
violence educational program, and a psychological evaluation.
Additionally, according to the plan, mother was to pay child
support, secure and maintain employment, secure housing, and
confirm visitation appointments.
On September 25, 2000, after mother failed to complete the
requirements of the foster care service plan, the Department filed
a plan with a change in the program goal to adoption. The
Department also sought to terminate mother's parental rights. On
October 19, 2000, the court approved the plan and terminated
mother's parental rights. Mother appealed to the circuit court.
- 2 -
On February 13, 2001, the circuit court also approved the plan and
terminated mother's parental rights.
Analysis
I.
Code § 16.1-283(C)(2) provides that a court may terminate a
parent's residual parental rights where a child has been placed
in foster care as a result of court commitment if the court
finds, based upon clear and convincing evidence, that (1) it is
in the best interests of the child; (2) that the parents without
good cause have been unwilling or unable within a reasonable
period of time not to exceed twelve months to remedy
substantially the conditions which led to the child's foster
care placement; and (3) that reasonable and appropriate efforts
of social, medical, mental health or other rehabilitative
agencies have been made to such end.
Mother argues that her attempts at fulfilling the
requirement of the foster care plan and her continued contact
with Christopher demonstrate that she will be able to remedy the
conditions that led to Christopher's foster care. Mother's
contact with Christopher during the time he has been in foster
care has been sporadic. Mother was scheduled to visit
Christopher every other week, but only visited him three times
from May 2000 through August 2000. On three occasions, mother
did not notify the Department in advance that she would not be
able to make her visits. From August 2000 through October 2000,
- 3 -
mother made no attempt to see or contact Christopher. Mother
has failed to maintain a relationship with her child.
Mother did not satisfy any of the requirements of the
foster care plan. Mother began several programs but failed to
complete the classes. Mother experienced a relapse in the
alcohol treatment and was incarcerated for two months. She did
not maintain employment or pay child support. Mother maintains
that she will be able to remedy the situation that led to
Christopher's foster care. However, "'past actions and
relationships over a meaningful period serve as good indicators
of what the future may be expected to hold.'" Linkous v.
Kingery, 10 Va. App. 45, 56, 390 S.E.2d 188, 194 (1990) (quoting
Frye v. Spotte, 4 Va. App. 530, 536, 359 S.E.2d 315, 319
(1987)). Although the Department informed mother of her
obligations under the foster care plan, she failed to complete
any of her obligations, despite the passage of over a year.
Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court did not
err in finding that the Department proved by clear and
convincing evidence that the conditions resulting in
Christopher's neglect were not likely to be corrected or
eliminated within a reasonable time.
II.
Mother contends she has good cause for her failure to
follow the requirement of the foster care plan. Mother explains
that she was incarcerated for a period of time, she suffered a
- 4 -
miscarriage, relapsed in her alcohol treatment, and was without
transportation.
Christopher was removed from mother's care in October 1999.
Mother enrolled in a parenting class in January 2000, but failed
to complete it. At the end of April 2000, mother had a
miscarriage and testified that afterwards she went on a drinking
"binge" for two weeks. Mother possessed ample time prior to her
miscarriage to complete the necessary courses. Additionally, at
the time of the hearing, mother had failed to take any steps to
enroll in another course. Mother testified that she last drank
alcohol in August 2000. She attended only nine sessions in her
treatment program and did not enroll in another course until
three days before her appeal before the circuit court.
Mother stole the license plates from a neighbor's vehicle.
As a result of her conviction for the theft of the plates,
mother was unable to drive. During the time she was without
transportation, mother failed to even call Christopher or
contact the Department to inquire after him. Mother failed to
demonstrate that her failure to remedy the situation that led to
foster care was the result of good cause. The trial court did
not err in terminating mother's parental rights. Accordingly, we
summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
Affirmed.
- 5 -