Children’s best interests

Concluding the trial court’s finding that termination of respondent-mother’s parental rights was in the children’s (MF and ND) best interests, the court affirmed. Toxicology tests indicated that another child (AF) “died from an overdose of fentanyl.” Respondent argued that the trial court considered just one factor, AF’s death, which respondent contended was insufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest decision. There was no record support for her “representation that the trial court only considered AF’s death when evaluating the children’s best interests.” Considering the “record, the trial court did not clearly err when it found that a preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that respondent lacked the judgment and parenting ability to properly supervise a child or keep that child safe.” Their future safety was just one factor the trial court considered when contemplating MF’s best interests. A preponderance of the evidence supported “a finding that the paternal aunt’s home was preferable to respondent’s home because it would provide MF with the care and safety he required to facilitate his continued growth and development. The trial court also considered the presence of a parent-child bond and it seemed to assume that such a bond existed between respondent and MF. However, it gave little weight to this factor.” The court found no error in the trial court’s analysis. As to ND, the trial “court similarly considered the potential risk of harm in respondent’s care, but it also found compelling the child’s need for permanence and finality.” The evidence supported a finding that terminating her “parental rights to ND would allow her to achieve the permanency and finality she required to better be able to address her trauma.” In sum, the court held that “the trial court did not clearly err when it found that termination of respondent’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests. The [trial] court properly weighed appropriate factors when considering each child’s needs. On balance, a preponderance of the evidence supports the trial court’s finding that the evidence weighed in favor of terminating” her parental rights.