05/30/2017
DA 16-0764
Case Number: DA 16-0764
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2017 MT 134N
IN THE MATTER OF:
A.R.N.,
A Youth in Need of Care.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Twenty-First Judicial District,
In and For the County of Ravalli, Cause No. DN 15-10
Honorable James A. Haynes, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Craig Shannon, Attorney at Law, Missoula, Montana
For Appellee:
Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General, C. Mark Fowler, Assistant
Attorney General, Helena, Montana
William Fulbright, Ravalli County Attorney, Howard F. Recht, Deputy
County Attorney, Hamilton, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: May 24, 2017
Decided: May 30, 2017
Filed:
__________________________________________
Clerk
Justice Laurie McKinnon delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating
Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not
serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this
Court’s quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana
Reports.
¶2 Appellant Birth Mother appeals the decision of the Twenty-First Judicial District
Court, Ravalli County, terminating her parental rights to A.R.N. Birth Mother argues that
the court failed to identify the standard of proof it employed in terminating her rights and
that there was not clear and convincing evidence that the circumstances rendering her unfit
were unlikely to change within a reasonable amount of time. We affirm.
¶3 A.R.N. was born in May of 2014 and has resided in foster care since October of
2015, nearly two-thirds of A.R.N.’s life. Birth Mother and Birth Father are not married
and Birth Mother has two other children who live with their birth father and are not the
subject of these proceedings.
¶4 On January 19, 2015, Birth Mother was exhibiting paranoid, erratic, and incoherent
behaviors. Law enforcement witnessed her screaming profanities into her phone while
holding A.R.N., then eight months old, while under the influence of drugs. As a result,
Birth Mother was charged with two counts of felony criminal endangerment.
¶5 In April of 2015, Birth Mother took one of her other children while that child was
in the care of the child’s birth father. When the Department of Public Health and Human
Services, Child and Family Services Division (the Department) intervened and removed
2
the child from Birth Mother one week later to return the child to birth father, the
Department found the child was filthy and unbathed, the child’s hair was matted, and was
wearing the same clothes when taken from birth father.
¶6 Prior to the Department’s filing its emergency petition for removal of A.R.N.,
A.R.N. had been residing primarily with Birth Father due to Birth Mother’s felony criminal
endangerment charges. However, Birth Father was arrested and detained on charges of
partner or family member assault and burglary on August 14, 2015. While detained, Birth
Mother surreptitiously obtained A.R.N. by having her sister and sister’s boyfriend pick up
A.R.N. from where she was staying and lying about their intentions. A.R.N. was returned
to Birth Father until October 2015, when Birth Father was charged again with partner or
family member assault. A.R.N. has remained in foster care since this most recent removal
from Birth Father.
¶7 On August 21, 2015, the Department filed a Petition for Emergency Protective
Services, Adjudication of Child as Youth in Need of Care and for Temporary Legal
Custody or, in the Alternative, Temporary Investigative Authority. The court granted
emergency protective services and temporary investigative authority to the Department on
September 10, 2015. On February 11, 2016, the Court adjudicated A.R.N. a youth in need
of care for a period of 6 months and approved a treatment plan for Birth Mother on March
17, 2016. On August 3, 2016, the Department petitioned the court to terminate Birth
Mother’s parental rights to A.R.N. due to Birth Mother’s failure to comply with the
treatment plan. Following a hearing on November 18, 2016, the District Court terminated
Birth Mother’s rights on November 23, 2016. The District Court found that it was
3
established “by clear and convincing evidence” that the best interest of A.R.N. will be
served by termination of the parent-child legal relationship.
¶8 Birth Mother has a known history of untreated mental illness, drug abuse, and
alcohol abuse. The treatment plan approved by the court addressed all of these areas of
concern. The chemical dependency evaluator diagnosed Birth Mother with a severe
cocaine use disorder, sever methamphetamine use disorder, and severe alcohol use
disorder. Birth Mother, however, did not believe she had any substance abuse disorder,
continued to abuse drugs and alcohol, and was unwilling to engage in any of the treatment
recommendations. The District Court determined that Birth Mother had failed to
participate in urinalysis testing and had not demonstrated any significant period of time
that she remained free of illegal drugs.
¶9 A psychological evaluation of Birth Mother concluded that she was entirely unfit to
parent due to a prolonged psychiatric crisis that rendered her homeless, unemployed,
addicted to stimulants, and unable to think logically. The evaluator opined that Birth
Mother would remain unfit to parent for the foreseeable future. Treatment
recommendations included inpatient chemical dependency rehabilitation, followed by
psychiatric medication and case management, and intensive mental health therapy. Birth
Mother has failed to follow through with the treatment recommendations concerning her
mental health.
¶10 The District Court found that Birth Mother did not comply with her treatment plan
when she failed to avail herself of any visitation opportunities with A.R.N. since August
4
of 2015; failed to participate in family-based therapy; failed to secure appropriate housing;
and failed to meet with the Department and keep the Department informed of her progress.
¶11 This Court reviews a district court’s decision to terminate parental rights for an
abuse of discretion. In re E.Z.C., 2013 MT 123, ¶ 19, 370 Mont. 116, 300 P.3d 1174. An
abuse of discretion occurs when a district court acts arbitrarily, without conscientious
judgment, or exceeds the bounds of reason. E.Z.C., ¶ 19. Upon review of the record, we
conclude that there was more than substantial evidence presented to the District Court for
its finding that Birth Mother had failed to complete her treatment plan and the court’s
conclusion that the conduct rendering Birth Mother unfit to parent A.R.N. was unlikely to
change. Birth Mother had a severe mental illness, which she refused to address; a severe
chemical and alcohol addiction, which she refused to address; remained homeless; and had
not exercised any of her visitation opportunities since A.R.N.’s removal in August of 2015.
¶12 The District Court addressed all of the statutory mandates and made specific and
detailed findings of fact which addressed the primary consideration of A.R.N.’s best
interests. Section 41-3-609(3), MCA; In re C.M.C., 2009 MT 153, ¶ 23, 350 Mont. 391,
208 P.3d 809. The court’s findings satisfied the requirements of § 41-3-609(1)(f), MCA,
that Birth Mother had not complied with an appropriate treatment plan and that the
condition rendering Birth Mother unfit was unlikely to change. As the record clearly
supports there was substantial evidence supporting each of the statutory requirements, we
will not address Birth Mother’s argument that any alleged deficiency in the court’s
enunciation of the burden of proof renders her termination of parental rights
5
constitutionally infirm. The District Court did not abuse its discretion in terminating Birth
Mother’s parental rights to A.R.N.
¶13 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our
Internal Operating Rules, which provides for unpublished opinions. This appeal presents
no constitutional issues, no issues of first impression, and does not establish new precedent
or modify existing precedent.
¶14 Affirmed.
/S/ LAURIE McKINNON
We Concur:
/S/ MICHAEL E WHEAT
/S/ DIRK M. SANDEFUR
/S/ JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA
/S/ JIM RICE
6
Matter of A.R.N. YINC
Combined Opinion