Child’s best interests; In re Atchley

Concluding that there was sufficient record evidence for the trial court to find that terminating respondent-father’s parental rights was in his child’s (KMG) best interests, the court held that the trial court did not clearly err in doing so. It noted that the referee’s reasoning as to KMG’s best interests “was sparse. The only considerations that the referee highlighted were respondent’s lengthy prison sentence, his lack of support for KMG, and the absence of a strong bond between respondent and KMG. However, given the situation, there were necessarily few facts to consider when addressing” the best-interests issue “because respondent had been in prison KMG’s entire life. Additionally, the considerations highlighted by the referee were supported by the record[,]” which showed “that KMG had never been in respondent’s care or custody because respondent was incarcerated when KMG was born. Further, during the events of the case, [he] did not have any formal visitation or interaction with KMG. Nor was there any testimony that [he] financially provided for KMG or made arrangements for his care during the time he was incarcerated.” As a result, “his total lack of history caring for KMG suggested that even if he were to be released during KMG’s childhood, he” failed to show “the ability to do so. The [trial] court was also permitted to consider the fact that [his] earliest release date is after KMG reaches legal adulthood.” While evidence was presented that they had a bond, a factor weighing against termination, “the other factors that the [trial] court considered, such as respondent’s limited ability to care for KMG and the advantages of KMG’s foster-care placement, weighed in favor of termination. At this point, KMG’s need for permanency, stability, and finality with his foster placement is paramount.” The court noted that at “the time of the best-interest hearing, KMG had been waiting eight months for his father to provide for his custody and care. Any placement with respondent’s mother was still theoretical as of the date of the best-interest hearing. KMG was entitled to stability, permanency, and finality, and he was receiving that stability with his foster family.” Affirmed.