Child’s best interests; In re Lombard

Holding that termination was in the child’s best interests, the court affirmed termination of respondent-mother’s parental rights. Her rights were terminated on the basis of her noncompliance with case services and the child’s need for stability and permanence. On appeal, the court rejected her argument that termination was not in the child’s best interests. The trial “court explicitly noted the ‘questionable’ bond between” respondent and the child “in making its determination, which was adequately supported by the record.” In addition, she “continually went AWOL from her” placements, which negatively impact her visitation with the child. Further, she “had significant mental health diagnoses throughout the case” and “did not appear to benefit from her limited involvement with mental-health services . . . because she did not engage in services long enough to begin working toward her treatment goals.” She also “did not consistently attend school or maintain employment due to departing from her placements.” And the child “needed permanency, stability, and finality that respondent” could not provide due to her inconsistency. Finally, the child’s sibling’s ongoing case did not impact the trial court’s ultimate conclusion that termination was in the child’s best interests in this case.