In re A.M.B.

1

IN THE MATTER OF: A.M.B.

No. COA 22-505

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

May 16, 2023

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Heard in the Court of Appeals 26 April 2023.

Appeal by Respondent from an order entered 9 March 2022 by Judge Joy Jones in Johnston County District Court No. 19 JT 299.

Holland & O'Connor, P.L.L.C., by Jennifer S O'Connor, for petitioner-appellee.

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP, by Marie V. Farmer, for Guardian ad Litem.

David A. Perez, for respondent-appellant Mother.

WOOD Judge.

Respondent-Mother ("Mother") appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to her child, Amy.^[1] After careful review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the trial court's order.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Johnston County Department of Social Services ("DSS") became involved with Amy after her birth on 29 December 2019. DSS received two Child Protective Services reports alleging neglect of Amy by Mother. The reports alleged that, at the time of Amy's birth, Mother was living in a hotel, did not have finances to provide for the necessities for a newborn, and did not have a car seat, diapers, or clothing for a newborn. In discussions with a DSS worker, Mother stated she did not know where she and Amy would go once they left the hospital. On 31 December 2019, DSS filed a juvenile petition alleging Amy to be neglected and dependent and obtained non-secure custody of the child. Amy was placed in foster care. On 8, 15, and 22 January 2020, the trial court held non-secure custody hearings where Mother consented to DSS's recommendation for Amy to remain in its custody. At the 22 January 2020 hearing, Mother waived further non-secure custody hearings.

On 18 February 2020, Mother completed a psychological evaluation. Mother was not diagnosed with any mental health disorders and was found to have an average IQ, but DSS recommended that she participate in a parent education course. The same day Mother had a visitation with Amy and entered into an out-of-home family services agreement. Mother agreed to complete a psychological evaluation, follow all recommendations, and obtain stable housing and employment.

The adjudication hearing on the abuse and neglect petition was held on 11 March 2020. The court adjudicated Amy neglected and dependent. The court found that: (1) Mother had been living in various shelters, motels, and tents with her boyfriend; (2) while Mother had employment with Office Max and was renting a hotel room currently, she had been advised that the store would close in January 2020 and would need to seek additional employment; (3) Mother planned on looking for homeless shelters for herself and Amy, but did not have the transportation to do so; (4) Mother did not have supplies to care for Amy and did not have the financial means to obtain formula to feed her daughter; and (5) Mother was unable to identify Amy's father at the time the juvenile petition was filed. The disposition hearing was held on the same date. The court placed Amy in the custody of DSS and she remained in foster care. The court ordered DSS to continue working toward reunification and permitted Mother to have visitations with Amy twice monthly. Mother did not appeal the adjudication or the disposition orders.

On 20 May 2020, a Permanency Planning hearing was conducted. The trial court found that Mother "has only recently begun to . . . address the identified risk issues due to the pandemic." The trial court found that Mother completed the psychological evaluation, but "has not begun parenting classes," "does not have housing and is continuing to live in a tent in the woods," and "does not have employment." She named an individual as Amy's father though paternity had not yet been established. The court further found that DSS attempted to assist Mother "with information concerning local shelters for housing." The court also found Mother had visited Amy since the last hearing and the visit went well. The court noted Mother "appears more comfortable with each visit, although she still requires guidance and support from the social worker" and, due to the pandemic, she "has had video visits when she is able to gain access to the internet." A primary permanent plan of reunification and a secondary permanent plan of guardianship with a relative or other suitable person was established. While Mother was scheduled to have an in-person visitation with Amy on 18 August 2020, her first in-person visit since March 2020, she did not attend. Mother did not contact DSS until the end of October 2020 to schedule another visit.

Mother attended a visit with Amy on 20 November 2020. On 1 December 2020, Mother, who continued to reside in a tent with her boyfriend, told DSS workers she was saving up money in order to obtain stable housing and planned to contact Selma Housing Authority to apply for housing on her next day off from work. Mother reported to DSS that she was employed at Denny's and that her first day was 11 November 2020. A 9 December 2020 permanency planning hearing was continued due to the pandemic court closure. Amy continued in non-secure custody with DSS. On 15 December 2020, Mother and her boyfriend completed the intake process for a parenting education course. Mother visited in person with Amy twice in December 2020 and once virtually in January 2021.

Mother completed two parenting education classes on 5 and 12 January 2021, while her boyfriend completed a class on 7 January 2021. On 27 January 2021, Mother reported to DSS that she and her boyfriend had moved to Arkansas and were residing with a friend. Mother reported the friend would help them "get on their feet while they get their daughter back" and that she would not be coming back to North Carolina. Mother reported she was not employed at this time. In February 2021, Mother engaged in a virtual visitation with Amy.

A permanency planning hearing was held on 10 March 2021. The trial court found that DSS had worked with Mother for over a year and no progress had been made to resolve the identified risk issues. Specifically, the trial court found that she had not obtained or maintained appropriate and stable housing or employment. The trial court further found that DSS provided Mother a list of housing resources, "which she failed to utilize, indicating she would rather stay with her boyfriend," and that her current residence in Arkansas, where she resided with a "previous boyfriend and his new girlfriend," was not "stable and appropriate housing." The trial court also found that Mother had failed to complete parenting classes, was not acting consistently with Amy's health and welfare, and was not a fit parent. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court ordered Amy to remain in DSS custody and implemented a primary permanent plan of adoption, with a secondary permanent plan of guardianship.

From March 2021 to October 2021, DSS unsuccessfully attempted to locate Mother. During this time, Mother did not contact DSS to inquire about Amy and did not participate in video visitations with her child. DSS filed a petition to terminate Mother's parental rights on 28 June 2021.

On 28 October 2021, Mother contacted DSS and reported that she and her boyfriend were asked to leave the friend's house shortly after the March 2021 hearing and were residing at a hotel. Mother advised DSS she obtained full-time employment at Walmart, and DSS provided her with a list of phone numbers and addresses of services in Arkansas to complete her case plan. A virtual visitation occurred on 4 November 2021.

Mother, by and through counsel, filed a response to the petition to terminate parental rights on 16 November 2021. The matter was originally scheduled to be heard on 27 October 2021 but was continued with the consent of all parties until 17 November 2021. The matter was again continued at the request of Mother's trial counsel until 8 December 2021. At the 8 December 2021 Webex hearing, the matter was rescheduled "to allow [Mother] to arrange to attend via WebEx through secure wifi, as she was in the breakroom at Walmart and the reception was not strong." Mother and DSS exchanged emails on 18 and 19 December 2021, but Mother did not contact DSS thereafter.

The termination of parental rights hearing was held on 26 January 2022. In preparation for this hearing, DSS arranged for Mother to go to the Sebastian County Department of Human Services to participate in the hearing via Webex; however, she did not appear at the hearing. Ms. Wilson, Amy's DSS case worker, testified that paternity has never been established for Amy. Ms. Wilson also testified that Mother had not completed parenting classes and continued to lack stable and appropriate housing throughout the life of this case. Additionally, Ms. Wilson testified that, between May 2020 and March 2021, Mother had at least two jobs and has been employed full-time by Walmart as of at least December 2021. Ms. Wilson testified that Mother has not maintained regular contact with DSS and, since Ms. Wilson received this case in November 2020, she estimated that Mother had engaged in five visitations with Amy.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found by clear cogent, and convincing evidence that grounds existed to terminate Mother's parental rights under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(1), (2), and (6) and found that grounds existed to terminate the parental rights of Amy's unknown father pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(5). The trial court further found that terminating Mother and ...