THOMAS PADGETT AND MARY HARTLINE PADGETT, APPELLANTS,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the concept of 'prospective' abuse and neglect is legally sufficient to support a judgment severing parental rights.
[1] A court may terminate parental rights based on the "prospective" abuse or neglect of a child, even if the parents have not yet had physical custody of that specific child…
[2] Clear and convincing evidence is required to support a judgment severing parental rights.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA minor child was removed from his parents at birth and remained in foster care. The final order of permanent commitment was entered based on evidence…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dependency Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
W.L.P., the minor child herein at issue, was taken from his parents immediately after his birth in December, 1985, through an HRS dependency proceeding. He has since remained in foster care. The final order of permanent commitment was entered in August, 1988; it is the subject of this appeal.
At the termination hearing, clear and convincing evidence was presented that W.L.P. would be subject to abuse and neglect if left with his natural parents, who had been guilty of these offenses with other children. There was no such evidence that the parents had ever been guilty of such abuse or neglect1 directed against W.L.P. since they never had physical custody of him.
The clear legal issue in this case, then, is the viability of the concept of “prospective” abuse and/or neglect, a concept which we noted in Spankie v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 505 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla.1987), and which was adopted in In the Interest of J.L.P., 416 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). See also, In the Interest of W.D.N., 443 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The dissent in Spankie contended that such “prospective” misconduct is speculative and, therefore, legally insufficient to support a judgment severing parental rights.
In accordance with J.L.P. and W.D.N., we affirm the instant judgment, and certify the question of “prospective” abuse, neglect or abandonment under Chapter 39 to be one of great public importance pursuant to Article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and ORFINGER, JJ., concur. . HRS argues that the parents’ noncompliance with all of the terms of a performance agreement, as subjectively evaluated by HRS, equates with neglect under section 39.464(3), Florida Statutes (1987). We cannot accept this argument because of its constitutional infirmities, as explained in In the Interest of R. W., 495 So. 2d 133 (Fla.1986) and In the Interest of R. W., 481 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). See also, Santo- sky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 102 S.Ct. 1388, 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Padgett v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 577 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1991)…SHAW, Chief Justice. We have for review Padgett v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 543 So. 2d 1317, 1318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), in which the district court certified the following: “[W]e ... certify the question of “prospective” abuse, neglect or abandonment under Chapter 39 to be one of great public importance_” We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b…1 / 2
-
IN the Interest OF D.J.S. and J.S.G. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 563 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…had previously been permanently committed. In Spankie v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 505 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 513 So. 2d 1063 (Fla.1987), Padgett v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 543 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989), and In the Interest of J.L.P., 416 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), the courts held that abuse may be established prospectively based on clear and convincing evidence that the child is or will be abused. The last two cases also…1 / 2
-
Palmer v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 547 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…In re Interest of R.W., 495 So. 2d 133 (Fla.1986); Fredrick v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 523 So. 2d 1164 (Fla.5th DCA), rev. denied, 531 So. 2d 1353 (Fla.1988). . Padgett v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 543 So. 2d 1317 (Fla.5th DCA 1989). .See also In re Interest of J.J.C., 498 So. 2d 604 (Fla.2d DCA 1986) (the court recognized the concept of prospective neglect as a basis to terminate parental rights where the mother was found to be a chronic schizophrenic. Her…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1982)
- In the Interest of R.W. v. Pollock, 495 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 1986)
- In the Interest of J. L. P., 416 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- In the Interest of W.D.N., II, 443 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- In the Interest of R.W. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 481 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Laurian Anne Rauen Spankie v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 505 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)