D.C.J.-S., MOTHER OF A.S., R.S., D.S., J.T., ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, 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 mother's parental rights were properly terminated based on her non-compliance with the case plan and the best interests of the children.
The mother failed to comply with numerous requirements of the case plan, including obtaining stable housing, participating in drug screening and treat…
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 Case Plan Compliance cases and more on FLexlaw
The mother, D.C.J.-S., appeals the final judgment terminating her parental rights to three children, A.S., R.S., and D.S. We affirm.
Although the Department made reasonable efforts to assist and encourage both parents1 to successfully complete the terms and conditions of the case plan with a goal of reunification, D.C.J.-S. was virtually non-compliant. Specifically, she failed to obtain stable housing and employment, failed to submit to random drug/urine screening or participate in drug and alcohol treatment and counseling, refused to sign releases for necessary information, did not complete counseling for victims of domestic violence for herself, nor participate in or assist with counseling for the children. D.C.J.-S. also made no effort to enroll in or complete a parenting class.
In addition to this non-compliance, the trial court noted that D.C.J.-S.’s parental rights to a sibling of A.S., D.S., and R.S. had previously been involuntarily terminated. See § 39.806(1)©, Fla. Stat. (2008). It also found termination of parental rights was in the manifest best interests of the children and that termination of parental rights was the least restrictive means to protect them. Padgett v. Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 577 So.2d 565 (Fla.1991). These findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence.
AFFIRMED.
LAWSON, EVANDER and COHEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Padgett v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 577 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1991)