J-S58030-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
IN RE: C.L., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: K.L., BIRTH MOTHER
No. 748 WDA 2014
Appeal from the Order April 9, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Orphans' Court at No(s): TPR 208 of 2013
IN RE: I.L.L., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: K.L., BIRTH MOTHER
No. 749 WDA 2014
Appeal from the Order April 9, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Orphans' Court at No(s): TPR 204 of 2013
IN RE: N.L., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
APPEAL OF: K.L., BIRTH MOTHER
No. 750 WDA 2014
Appeal from the Order April 9, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Orphans' Court at No(s): TPR 207 of 2013
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., BENDER, P.J.E., and PLATT*, J.
MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.: FILED SEPTEMBER 05, 2014
K.L. (Mother) appeals from the orders that involuntarily terminated her
parental rights to I.L.L. (born in February of 2008), C.L. (born in March of
*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S58030-14
2009), and N.L. (born in September of 2010) (collectively Children) pursuant
to 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(5), (8) and (b).1 We affirm.
The family first became known to the Allegheny County Office of
abuse, mental health instability and domestic violence resulting in the
6/17/14, at Exhibit A ¶ 3.2 The three Children at issue in the present case
2012, and were
adjudicated dependent on November 13, 2012. Id. at ¶ 4. The
care of the Children and the condition of the home. Specifically, the court
noted:
b. The investigating caseworker completed a Safety Assessment
of the home. The caseworker found the home to be
inappropriate due to exposed wiring, open electrical outlets,
exposed ventilation holes in the walls, holes in the cabinetry, a
broken screen door, and raised nails on the floor. Located in the
children's sleeping space were cribs with lids constructed of cage
doors, plastic safety ties, and tape.
c. According to the intake caseworker, the children were
observed chewing on phone cords which were plugged into the
wall, climbing on the stove, eating Styrofoam, and spitting on to
____________________________________________
1
involuntarily terminated. Father is not a party to the current appeal; nor has
he filed a separate appeal.
2
tal rights to these two other children were involuntarily
terminated in August of 2004 and May of 2005.
-2-
J-S58030-14
the floor. Furthermore, during the visit, [I.L.L.] and [C. L.] were
undressed wearing only pull ups. The report states mother did
not redirect the children's behavior.
Id. at 5 b. and 5 c.
M
work with crisis in[-]home services, complete a POWER evaluation and follow
recommendations, and attend an AFA interactional and individual
assessment and locate housing [since Mother had been evicted from the
home that she had shared with the Children]. Id. 5 d. Because Mother was
not fulfilling the conditions of the Voluntary Placement Agreement, an
emergency custody order was entered on October 4, 2012. Thus, legal
custody was transferred to CYF and placement of the Children continued.
The court provided a detailed placement history for the Children, indicating
that since August 27, 2013, I.L.L. has been in placement with T.C., and that
C.L. joined N.L. on December 22, 2013, at the home of J.D. and S.D. Id. at
require wrap- Id. at ¶ 8.
The court also discussed the family service plan established for
Mother, listing the numerous goals, the many services provided, and
Id. at ¶¶ 9-17. Dr. Neil
Rosenblum performed interactional evaluations of the Children with their
respective foster parent/parents. He also performed this type of evaluation
of the Children with Mother and an individual evaluation of Mother. The
-3-
J-S58030-14
observations, assessments and recommendations. The court stated:
a. Mother repeatedly uses poor judgment due to a combination
of emotional dependency and limited intellectual resources. She
routinely allows people to take advantage of her. She also
struggles in her ability to protect her [C]hildren from the very
dysfunctional lifestyle to which they were exposed for many
years. She is naïve, easily manipulated, but well intentioned.
b. During the interactional evaluation with [M]other, [I.L.L.]
seemed to be pleased to greet his [M]other in the waiting room
and gave her a hug. Although he was eager to enter the
playroom, immediately he wanted to know whether T.I., his
foster mother, could come in. He seemed to be disappointed
when told no, and seems to have a growing emotional
dependency on foster mother. [C.L.] and [N.L.] were both glad
to see [M]other and went up and gave her big hugs. At first,
neither [C.L.] nor [I.L.L.] seemed eager to play with the other.
Everyone was content to do their own thing. Mother would
generally just watch and occasionally talk to the children about
what they were doing. It seemed to be very difficult for her to
initiate activity. At Dr. Rosenblum's request, [M]other began to
do some reading with the [C]hildren. He suggested a book that
L.] to find some of the hidden
pictures, but she was not particularly enthusiastic and did not
give [N.L.] any praise. Mother did not try to do any reading with
the boys. When Dr. Rosenblum handed [M]other a book called
and is familiar with, [M]other
talked him into building a garage out of Duplo blocks instead.
For some reason she did not seem to want to read with [I.L.L.].
Early in the session [C.L.] asked when he was going to leave.
Mother bypassed his question by telling him he just got here.
c. Mother was not particularly effective in settling conflicts
between the boys. She also did not join them in their play at all.
Mother suggested that the trucks needed a garage and she
began to build one with Duplo blocks. She did not ask the boys
to j
-4-
J-S58030-14
d. Mother remained very flat and lacking in enthusiasm with the
[C]hildren. She did not display any affection other than on one
beaut
session [N.L.] came over and started helping [M]other build the
garage.
e. Several times during the session [I.L.L.] left the room to
check in with his foster mother. He seems to be very
emotionally dependent on her. He asked if she could come in
more than once. [I.L.L.] also expressed worry about his foster
brother, [M.], and went out to foster mother to ask about him.
f. Mother did not make an effort to provide the [C]hildren with
structure or identify things for them to do. She remained very
passive and content to allow the [C]hildren to do their own thing
with only a few exceptions. At the end of the evaluation session
[M]other did ask the [C]hildren to help her clean up.
g. Mother lacks appropriate parenting skills.
h. Mother remains depressed, lethargic and inactive in her
relationship with her [C]hildren. She is not able to provide them
with the structure, stimulation, emotional support or attention
that they need to progress in their development.
i. Mother has been evicted from homes in the past and is
inadequate when it comes to making decisions or leading an
independent lifestyle. Her interaction with the [C]hildren was
very limited, with her being very passive in her parenting skills.
j. While the [C]hildren love their [M]other, she has become a
peripheral figure in their lives. Accordingly, the relationship is
not so necessary and sufficient to maintain that ending it would
cause the [C]hildren to experience adverse emotional
consequences or significant trauma.
. . .
n. [C.L.] and [N.L.] are in an excellent placement with [J.D.] and
teachers. They have been very active in helping [C.L.] adjust to
their home. They are able to provide [C.L.] with a lot of
consistency, needed structure as well as acceptance and
-5-
J-S58030-14
sustained emotional support. They are very comfortable in
dealing with the efforts of [C.L.] and [N.L.] in testing limits. They
are proud of the accomplishments that [N.L.] has sustained and
are very optimistic that [C.L.] will continue to make progress as
well. This is an outstanding placement for [C.L.] and [N.L.] with
the foster parents being more than capable of providing the
[C]hildren with a stable and secure home at this time and into
the future.
o. [I.L.L.] remains a far more challenging, developmentally
impaired youngster than his two younger siblings. [I.L.L.] has
been diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder. He is
very awkward in his social emotional development, with limited
social skills and inconsistency in his willingness or ability to
interact effectively with other people. His foster mother, [T.I.],
has a good deal of experience in working with special needs
children. She has the skills to provide [I.L.L.] with needed
structure as well as consistent discipline and support. She is
committed to [I.L.L.] and desires providing him with a
supportive home environment at this time and into the future.
Id. at 19 a-j and n-o.
Based upon the evidence presented, the court determined that CYF
had carried its burden of proof and, thus, ordered the termination of
also recognized that Mother had not made significant enough progress to
enriched environments would be detrimental to the safety and welfare of the
Id. at ¶ 32.
-6-
J-S58030-14
Mother filed a timely notice of appeal and a concise statement of
errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)(2)(i). She
now raises the following issue for our review:
Did the trial court abuse its discretion and/or err as a matter of
law in concluding that CYF met its burden of proving by clear and
would best serve the needs and welfare of the [C]hildren
pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(b)?
Our standard of review regarding orders terminating parental rights is
as follows:
When reviewing an appeal from a decree terminating parental
rights, we are limited to determining whether the decision of the
trial court is supported by competent evidence. Absent an
abuse of discretion, an error of law, or insufficient evidentiary
Where a trial court has granted a petition to involuntarily
terminate parental rights, this Court must accord the hearing
rence that we would give to a
jury verdict. We must employ a broad, comprehensive review
decision is supported by competent evidence.
In re S.H., 879 A.2d 802, 805 (Pa. Super. 2005). In termination cases, the
burden is upon the petitioner to prove by clear and convincing evidence that
the asserted grounds for seeking the termination of parental rights are valid.
Id. at 806. We have previously stated:
The standard of clear and convincing evidence is defined as
enable the trier of fact to come to a clear conviction, without
-7-
J-S58030-14
In re J.L.C. & J.R.C., 837 A.2d 1247, 1251 (Pa. Super. 2003).
The trial court is free to believe all, part, or none of the evidence
presented and is likewise free to make all credibility determinations and
resolve conflicts in the evidence. In re M.G., 855 A.2d 68, 73-74 (Pa.
Super. 2004). If competent
will affirm even if the record could also support the opposite result. In re
Adoption of T.B.B., 835 A.2d 387, 394 (Pa. Super. 2003). Additionally,
sion as to any one
In re
B.L.W., 843 A.2d 380, 384 (Pa. Super. 2004) (en banc), appeal denied, 863
A.2d 1141 (Pa. 2004).
The termination of parental rights is controlled by 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511.
Under this statute, the trial court must engage in a bifurcated process in
which it initially focuses on the conduct of the parent under Section 2511(a).
See In the Interest of B.C., 36 A.3d 601 (Pa. Super. 2012). If the trial
court determines th
Section 2511(a), it must then engage in an analysis of the best interests of
the child under Section 2511(b). See id.
as it relates to her conduct under Section 2511(a); but rather, she limits her
Section 2511(b).
-8-
J-S58030-14
Section § 2511(b) provides:
(b) Other considerations. The court in terminating the
rights of a parent shall give primary consideration to the
developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare
of the child. The rights of a parent shall not be terminated
solely on the basis of environmental factors such as
inadequate housing, furnishings, income, clothing and
medical care if found to be beyond the control of the
parent. With respect to any petition filed pursuant to
subsection (a)(1), (6) or (8), the court shall not consider
any efforts by the parent to remedy the conditions
described therein which are first initiated subsequent to
the giving of notice of the filing of the petition.
23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(b).
Pursuant to Section 2511(b), the trial court must take into account
whether a natural parental bond exists between child and parent, and
whether termination would destroy an existing, necessary and beneficial
relationship. In re C.S., 761 A.2d 1197, 1202 (Pa. Super. 2000) (en banc).
In In re C.M.S., 884 A.2d 1284, 1287 (Pa.Super. 2005),
and stability are involved in the inquiry into needs and welfare of
must also discern the nature and status of the parent-child bond,
with utmost attention to the effect on the child of permanently
severing that bond. Id. However, the extent of the bond-effect
analysis necessarily depends on the circumstances of the
particular case. In re K.Z.S., 946 A.2d 753, 763 (Pa.Super.
2008).
major aspect of the Subsection 2511(b) best-interest analysis, it
is nonetheless only one of many factors to be considered by the
court when determining what is in the best interest of the child.
The mere existence of an emotional bond does not preclude the
examine the status of the bond to determine whether its
-9-
J-S58030-14
As we explained in In re A.S., 11 A.3d 473, 483
(Pa. Super. 2010):
[I]n addition to a bond examination, the trial court can
equally emphasize the safety needs of the child, and
should also consider the intangibles, such as the love,
comfort, security, and stability the child might have
with the foster parent. Additionally, this Court stated
that the trial court should consider the importance of
continuity of relationships and whether any existing
parent-child bond can be severed without detrimental
effects on the child.
In re N.A.M., 33 A.3d 95, 103 (Pa. Super. 2011) (citation omitted).
Mother argues that she loves the Children and that they love her, as
evidenced by the fact that at visitations they run up to her and hug her.
independently parent these children does not mean that she cannot provide
them with a valued and beneficial relationsh
Id. at 18.
would best serve the needs and welfare of the Children. T.C.O. at 3. The
court relied on the testimony and reports from Dr. Rosenblum, who indicated
Mother, to change the permanency goal to adoption. Specifically, in his
report, authored after evaluations were conducted in February of 2014, Dr.
become a peripheral figure in their lives. As such I do not believe that their
- 10 -
J-S58030-14
relationship is so necessary and sufficient to maintain that ending it would
cause the children to experience adverse emotional consequences or
In response to Mother
existence of a bond or attachment of a child to a parent will not necessarily
result in the denial of a termination petition. See In re K.K.R.-S., 958 A.2d
535 (Pa. Super. 2008). Accordingly, based upon our review of the record,
we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in terminating
we affirm the court orders terminating her parental rights.
Orders affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 9/5/2014
- 11 -