T.C., FATHER OF C.D., O.C., S.C., Z.C., MINOR CHILDREN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed termination of parental rights under section 39.806(1)(c) where the trial court found parents unable to provide food, clothing, medical care, or ensure children's safety and well-being, despite parental incarceration and substance abuse alone being insufficient grounds.
Termination of parental rights is proper when the trial court finds parents unable to provide essential care and ensure children's safety, even though incarceration and substance abuse alone are insufficient grounds.
[1] Habitual drug and alcohol use and parental incarceration, while not independent grounds for termination of parental rights, may support termination when combined with fin…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFather T.C. appealed termination of parental rights for four minor children. The trial court found parents unable to provide food, clothing, medical c…
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 Grounds For Termination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
As to all four children we affirm the findings and conclusions that the Department of Children and Family Services established grounds for termination of parental rights under section 39.806(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2007), although we agree with appellant that the presumption in section 39.806(l)(e), Florida Statutes (2007), was unavailable to the Department as to Z.C. See generally C.C. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 812 So. 2d 520, 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).
The order of termination of parental rights and permanent commitment under review finds that the “parents do not have the ability to provide the children with food, clothing, or medical care” and cannot “provide for the children’s safety, well-being, and physical, mental and emotional health.” Although habitual drug and alcohol use is not grounds, without more, for termination of parental rights, see C.C., 812 So. 2d at 523, just as appellant’s now-concluded thirteen-month incarceration is not in itself a basis for termination of parental rights, see B.C. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 887 So. 2d 1046, 1057 (Fla.2004), neither do these factors undercut the trial court’s findings that the parents are unable to care for these children without putting their health, safety and welfare at risk, or the conclusion that termination of parental rights is in the children’s best interest.
Affirmed.
BROWNING, C.J., KAHN, and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- B.C. v. Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 887 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 2004)
- C.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 812 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)