In re Interest of D.D.M.

270 A.3d 1163 (Table)

In the INTEREST OF: D.D.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

In the Interest of: D.D.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

In the Interest of: D.R.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

In the Interest of: D.R.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

In the Interest of: D.S.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

In the Interest of: D.S.M., a Minor, a/k/a D.M., Jr., a Minor

Appeal of: D.M., Sr., Father

No. 753 EDA 2021

No. 754 EDA 2021

No. 755 EDA 2021

No. 757 EDA 2021

No. 760 EDA 2021

No. 762 EDA 2021

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Filed: December 23, 2021

MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, J.:

D.M., Sr. (Father) appeals from the permanency review orders changing the permanency goal from reunification to adoption pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6351, and the decrees involuntarily terminating his parental rights¹ to his three children pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(2), (5), (8) and (b).² Upon review, we find no abuse of discretion with respect to the change of goal orders and we agree with the trial court's finding that the Department of Human Services established by clear and convincing evidence that termination was in the children's best interests. We rely upon the trial court's opinion, authored by the Honorable Joseph L. Fernandes, to affirm the orders and decrees.

Father and G.T. (Mother)³ are the parents of three minor children, D.D.M. (born 9/16), D.R.M. (born 3/15), and D.S.M. (born 5/14) (collectively, Children). Following is an abbreviated timeline of the procedural and factual history of this case:

March 26, 2019 : [Department of Human Services] (DHS) became involved with this family when a General Protective Services (GPS) report alleged Children were being neglected by their parents; that the home was dirty, malodorous, in generally poor condition, in need of several repairs, had potentially illegal utility connections, was possibly being resided in illegally, and lacked appropriate sleeping arrangement and food; that Father smoked marijuana and sold the family's Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to purchase drugs; that neither of the [p]arents paid rent; that Mother did not change [D.D.M.'s] diaper in a timely manner; that the Children did not attend day care; that [D.S.M.] had developmental delays and a possible speech impediment; that both Parents were unemployed; that Mother received Department of Public Welfare (DPW) benefits; that Father suffered from untreated bipolar disorder ; that two additional adults resided in the home; and that the family required a higher level of care than community-based Family Empowerment Services (FES) could provide. The report was determined to be valid.

March 28, 2019 : DHS visited the home and observed that: exterior of home was in poor condition; a first-floor window was covered with plywood; front door did not have an operable lock; ceiling was leaking and unstable; leak had caused water damage to the walls; there was a hole in the floor; a rear window had a broken glass pane filled with clothing; the refrigerator was covered in mold, contained no food, and was inoperable; only 3-4 cans of food sat in the kitchen cabinets; the kitchen sink had no water connection; Children slept on old cushions on the floor; and home was cluttered with trash, clothing, and animal feces. DHS informed Mother that the home was not appropriate for Children and asked if there were any family resources who could care for them while repairs were completed. Father arrived home, became irate, and verbally threatened DHS. Father attempted to enter DHS's vehicle but was restrained by neighbors. DHS contacted the Philadelphia Police, who were dispatched to the home. Children's Paternal Grandmother arrived at the home and stated she would be able to temporarily care for the Children, but that they could not stay on an extended basis because she lived in a senior living facility. DHS developed a one-night safety plan for the Children, where they would reside with Paternal Grandmother.

March 29, 2019 : DHS investigated other family members for possible kinship placement and ultimately determined a Family Friend as a possible resource. Family Friend's home, upon investigation, had all operable utilities, ample space and food, and appropriate sleeping arrangements for each of the Children. Family Friend was willing and able to care for Children. DHS completed criminal and ChildLine clearances for Family Friend and household members and obtained an Order of Protective Custody (OPC) for Children and placed them with Family Friend.

April 1, 2019 : Court held shelter care hearing. Father referred to Behavioral Health Service (BHS) for consult/evaluation.

April 9, 2019 : Court held adjudicatory hearing. Father attended. Children adjudicated dependent based on present inability to provide proper parental care and control and committed to DHS custody. Father was referred to Achieving Reunification Center (ARC) for services, including housing. Visitation changed to allow for visitation in the kinship home, supervised by Family Friend.

May 10, 2019 : Community Umbrella Agency (CUA) held initial single case plan (SCP) meeting, listing each child's goal as reunification with parents. Father's objectives were to comply with the needed services and court orders, comply with ARC for parenting education, housing assistance, and employment services, attend supervised visitation with Children, comply with BHS mental health evaluation and recommendations, and comply with anger management and domestic violence services. Father did not participate in the meeting.

June 26, 2019 : Court held review hearing. Father did not attend. Children to remain in kinship care.

July 30, 2019 : Court held permanency review hearing. Father did not attend. Court determined Father had not been attending ARC, nor had he attended BHS evaluation. DHS again referred Father to ARC and BHS, as well as to the Clinical Evaluation Unit (CEU) for immediate assessment. Supervised visitation continued, with CUA supervising once per month.

August 8, 2019: Father underwent psychological evaluation, which indicated Father presented as mistrustful, irritable, and uncooperative. He refused to provide pertinent information, including mental health history, where he slept, the disability for which he received SSI, or information about his older children (who are not subjects of this appeal). The report indicated Father did not meet diagnostic criteria for any specific disorder, but Intermittent Explosive Disorder could not be ruled out, and other diagnostic impressions included unspecified neurocognitive disorder, cannabis and tobacco use disorder, and homelessness. Recommendations included: complete parenting capacity evaluation (PCE) to determine impact of neurocognitive dysfunction on parenting ability; complete CEU substance abuse assessment and comply with recommendations; complete neurological examination, and comply with DHS requests and recommendations, including anger management and parenting classes.

October 22, 2019: Court held permanency review hearing. Father did not attend. Father was ordered to engage ARC and undergo a PCE. Children remained committed to DHS custody and placement at Family Friend. Visitation changed to weekly, supervised visits at the agency.

February 18, 2020 : Court held review hearing. Father did not attend. Commitment and placement remained. Court ordered a best interests guardian ad litem (GAL) for Children.⁴

July 28, 2020 : Court held permanency review hearing. Father did not attend and was found minimally compliant with SCP. Children received trauma therapy and Elwyn services (behavioral health services). Father was referred to CEU for drug screen and assessment and was again ordered to complete PCE, and the court ordered CUA to assist Father with that and with application for medical assistance. Father was ordered to complete ARC workshops for housing, parenting and employment. Visitations were ordered supervised virtual due to the COVID-19 pandemic, to be changed to bi-weekly supervised two-hour visits when pandemic restrictions were limited. CUA was ordered to explore voluntary relinquishment with Father.

December 15, 2020 : Court held permanency review hearing. Father attended. He was again found minimally compliant with his SCP and had made minimal progress toward alleviating circumstances necessitating Children's placement. Father and Mother refused to disclose current address, Father failed to sign necessary paperwork to complete PCE, and Father did not complete ARC programs (parenting, education, employment services, or anger management counseling). Two of the Children were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), one of whom was prescribed medication. Father was ordered to provide proof of employment or benefits received and was again referred to CEU for dual diagnosis assessment, monitoring, and three random drug screens. He was also ordered to sign necessary paperwork for the PCE and complete the evaluation as well as a neurological evaluation. Court appointed legal counsel for children. See supra, at n.3.

January 6, 2021 : Two of the three children's permanency goals were changed to adoption, and the third child's alternate/concurrent goal was identified as adoption. Father's objectives included compliance with needed services and court orders; compliance with ARC for parenting, education, anger management, and employment services; attending supervised visitation/virtual visitation; compliance with DHS evaluation and recommendations; compliance with anger management and domestic violence services; signing consents and SCPs; compliance with PCE; attending neurological appointments; and, providing CUA with proof of income.

Trial Court Opinion, 5/20/21, at 2-6.

On March 26, 2021, the court held a goal...