|
In this
relatively straightforward termination of parental rights appeal,
the appellate court affirmed the trial court's findings that the
mother had failed to rehabilitate and that termination of parental
rights was in the children's best interests.
The mother,
who suffered from bipolar disorder, contended that she had indeed
rehabilitated to an extent where she could successfully parent her
children. She claimed that she was taking her psychotropic medication
and had made significant improvement with therapy. Indeed, the mother's
clinician opined that the mother was "committed to improving her
mental health." However, the appellate court ruled that the court
was permitted to give greater weight to the testimony of the court-appointed
psychologist who, as late as July, 2005, reported that the mother
"utterly refused to comply with her medical regimen." The trial
court was permitted to find that the mother's recent efforts were
"too little, too late."
The appellate
court also upheld the trial court's finding that termination was
in the best interests of the children, who, though bonded with their
mother, expressed some desire to continue in their foster homes
rather than return home. The trial court concluded that the children's
need for permanency, combined with the mother's intermittent and
inadequate efforts to improve her mental health, militated in favor
of terminating parental rights.
This
case underscores the need for parents to demonstrate progress with
their court-identified parenting issues before too much time passes.
Progress that is made after the filing of the TPR petition may not
be credited or given much weight by the court.
|
