In re G.F.

1

IN THE INTEREST OF: G.F., A MINOR APPEAL OF: F.F., FATHER IN THE INTEREST OF: A.F., A MINOR APPEAL OF: F.F., FATHER IN THE INTEREST OF: L.F., A MINOR APPEAL OF: F.F., FATHER IN THE INTEREST OF: E.F., A MINOR APPEAL OF: F.F., FATHER IN THE INTEREST OF: O.F., A MINOR APPEAL OF: F.F., FATHER IN THE INTEREST OF: L.M., A MINOR APPEAL OF: J.F., MOTHER IN THE INTEREST OF: W.M., A MINOR APPEAL OF: J.F., MOTHER

Nos. 1439 MDA 2023, 1440 MDA 2023, 1441 MDA 2023, 1442 MDA 2023, 1443 MDA 2023, 1444 MDA 2023, 1445 MDA 2023

Nos. J-A07006-24, J-A07007-24

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

June 14, 2024

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No CP-31-DP-0000018-2023

Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No CP-31-DP-0000030-2023

Appeal from the Order Entered September 14, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No CP-31-DP-0000031-2023

Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No CP-31-DP-0000032-2023 Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No: CP-31-DP-0000033-2023

Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No: CP-31-DP-0000034-2023 Appeal from the Order Entered September 15, 2023 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Juvenile Division at No: CP-31-DP-0000035-2023

BEFORE: STABILE, J., SULLIVAN, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E. ^[*]

MEMORANDUM

STABILE, J.

In these consolidated cases, F.F. ("Father") appeals the September 15, 2023 orders that adjudicated as dependent his daughter, G.F., born in June 2007; his two sons, O.F., born in February 2009, and E.F., born in March 2012; and his daughters, L.F., born in March 2015; and A.F., born in August 2021. Separately, J.F. ("Mother") appeals the September 15, 2023 orders that adjudicated as dependent her biological sons, L.M., born in April 2014; and W.M., born in March 2016.^[1] After careful review, we affirm.

We gather the relevant factual and procedural history of this matter from the certified record. Father is the natural father of G.F., O.F., E.F., L.F., and A.F., and the stepfather of L.M. and W.M. Mother is the natural mother of L.M., W.M., and A.F., and stepmother to the remaining children. Parents have been married since 2020, after Father's first wife and natural mother of G.F., O.F., E.F., and L.F., passed away in 2019.^[2] See N.T., 9/13/23, at 16, 35. Parents have resided with G.F., O.F., E.F., L.M., L.F., W.M., and A.F. (collectively, "the Children") on a family farm located in Warriors Mark Township, Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania. Father works remotely in information technology and Mother is a stay-at-home parent. See N.T., 8/25/23, at 26. We also gather that Children have been homeschooled for the entirety of their lives. See id. at 24; N.T., 9/13/23, at 35-36.

Huntingdon County Children and Youth Services ("CYS" or "the Agency") first became involved with this family on June 17, 2023, when Father contacted the Agency to unsuccessfully request that G.F. be committed to a "juvenile facility" after she attempted to "run away" from Parents' home on seven different occasions. See N.T., 9/13/23, at 3-4, 35. Thereafter, on June 19, 2023, the Agency received a ChildLine report indicating that G.F. did not feel safe in Parents' home and alleging, inter alia, that Parents were restraining her in the home using leather dog leashes and zip ties. See id. at 34-35.

That same day, CYS caseworker Christi Shawley responded to the family residence. Initially, Parents believed that Ms. Shawley was visiting in response to Father's earlier request that G.F. be institutionalized. To that end, Parents initially responded favorably to Ms. Shawley's presence and repeated their shared desire to have G.F. removed. See id. at 35. Parents' demeanors soured, however, when Ms. Shawley informed them of the Agency's concerns. Thereafter, Parents refused to cooperate with Ms. Shawley's investigation. See id. at 4-6, 35-36. Specifically, they would not permit Ms. Shawley to enter their home or to speak with any of the Children. See id.

Ms. Shawley called upon the assistance of the Pennsylvania State Police ("the PSP"), who responded to the scene. Eventually, Ms. Shawley was able to extricate, examine, and interview G.F. for approximately fifteen minutes at a short distance from the home, but still within Parents' line of sight and hearing. See id. at 36-37, 43. During this brief interaction, Ms. Shawley noted multiple bruises on G.F.'s right wrist, which G.F. confirmed were from a zip tie. See id. at 36. G.F. also substantiated that Parents were confining her in the home by using a leash connected to her belt loop. See id. G.F. also averred that Mother had struck her and given her a bloody nose while trying to prevent G.F. from running away during a previous incident. See id. at 12, 37-38. Ms. Shawley also reported that many of G.F.'s answers appeared to be "scripted" and "very hesitant," which Ms. Shawley believed were caused by Parents' close proximity. See id. at 37, 44-45.

On June 27, 2023, CYS filed a petition alleging that G.F. was a dependent child. Robert M. Covell, Esquire, was appointed to serve as her guardian ad litem ("GAL"). The court held an initial dependency hearing with respect to G.F. on July 25, 2023. Therein, CYS requested and was granted a continuance in order to complete its investigation. See N.T., 7/25/23, at 1-4. At the conclusion of this brief proceeding, the trial court granted an oral request advanced by Parents' counsel and appointed Andrea Lehman, Esquire, to serve as G.F.'s legal interest counsel. See id. at 3.

On August 4, 2023, G.F. absconded from Parents' home and began residing with her maternal grandparents ("Maternal Grandparents") in Phillipsburg, Pennsylvania. See N.T., 9/13/23, at 11, 17. It also came to light that Parents were attempting to enroll G.F. in intervention programs for troubled teens located out of state. See id. at 12-14. Specifically, Father explained that Parents were "looking for a private solution for [G.F.] instead of allowing CYS to choose" what occurred. See id. at 13. These events were not contemporaneously disclosed to the trial court. See id. at 12-14.

On August 23, 2023, the Agency received a second ChildLine report alleging that Parents were utilizing inappropriate physical discipline and corporal punishment in the home. The same day, CYS was awarded emergency protective custody of the Children. CYS caseworkers and PSP troopers cooperated in removing the Children. During the removal, Mother extolled the Children to not speak with representatives of the Agency without Parents' counsel present. See N.T., 9/13/23, at 40. On August 25, 2023, the trial court held a shelter care hearing and affirmed the Children's placement.^[3]

During the shelter care hearing, Father denied using a leash or zip ties to restrain G.F. See N.T., 8/25/23, at 7-11. However, he invoked his privilege against self-incrimination pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when asked if anyone in the home had used zip ties or a leash to restrain G.F. See id. at 10-12. Father also invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked if he uses a "wooden paddle" to discipline the Children. See id. at 15. Father also admitted that Parents continued to refuse CYS access to his home and the Children up until their removal. See id. at 28.

Also on August 25, 2023, CYS filed dependency petitions with respect to O.F., E.F., L.M., L.F., W.M., and A.F. On September 13, 2023, the court held a consolidated hearing on the various petitions pertaining to the Children. Therein, G.F., E.F., L.F., Mother, and CYS director Kelvin Abrashoff testified. At the time of this hearing, G.F. was sixteen years old, E.F. was eleven years old, and L.F. was eight years old. They were interviewed in camera with the attorneys for each party present.^[4]Mother and Mr. Abrashoff testified in open court. The Agency also admitted the testimony adduced during the prior hearings. See N.T., 9/13/23, at 1. During her testimony, we note that Mother invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination "when asked about the incident in which she struck G.F. in the process of stopping her from escaping over a fence, about her use of the dog leash on G.F., and about what forms of discipline she uses on the Children." Trial Court Opinion, 11/21/23, at ¶ 44 (citing N.T., 9/13/23, at 58-59, 60, 66).

On September 15, 2023, the trial court filed orders of adjudication and disposition at the above-captioned docket numbers adjudicating the Children dependent within the meaning of the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301-65 ("the Act"). Specifically, the trial court found that the Children were "without proper care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for [their] physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals." 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302; see also Orders of Adjudication, 9/15/23, at 2. Additionally, the trial court determined that G.F. was also dependent due to having "committed a specific act or acts of habitual disobedience of the reasonable and lawful commands of [her] parent, guardian, or other custodian" and "being ungovernable and found to be in need of care, treatment, or supervision." 42 Pa.C.S. § 6302; see also Order of Adjudications, 9/15/23, at 2.

On October 12, 2023, Father filed separate, timely notices of appeal with respect to the adjudications...