Termination under §§ 19b(3)(b)(i), (g), & (j); In re Williams; In re Ellis; In re VanDalen; People v. Iannucci; Froling v. Carpenter; In re TK; Abandoned issue; In re JS & SM; In re HRC; Child’s best interests; In re Moss Minors; In re White

The court held that the trial court properly terminated respondent-father’s parental rights to the child where at least one statutory ground (§ (g)) was established by clear and convincing evidence and it was in the child’s best interests. The court assumed for purposes of this opinion that the trial court’s statutory grounds determination was not clearly erroneous. Moreover, it reviewed the record and was not left with a definite and firm conviction that the trial court was mistaken in determining that the DHHS established facts by clear and convincing evidence that satisfied § (g), “which permits terminating parental rights when ‘[t]he parent, although, in the court’s discretion, financially able to do so, fails to provide proper care or custody for the child and there is no reasonable expectation that the parent will be able to provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time considering the child’s age.’ It is only necessary to establish one statutory ground as a basis to support terminating a respondent’s parental rights.” Affirmed.