Child’s best interests; In re Atchley

Holding that the trial court did not clearly err in finding that terminating respondents-parents’ parental rights to the child (LC) was in his best interests, the court affirmed the termination order. While they highlighted “testimony suggesting that they had a strong bond, there was also evidence that they were inattentive during parenting times and that the bond between LC and respondents was more like the bond between a babysitter and a child rather than a parent and a child. Thus, the trial court did not clearly err by finding that the bond . . . was limited. Likewise, because there was evidence that LC was thriving in his foster placement and was strongly bonded to his foster family, the [trial] court’s finding that there was a significant bond between LC and his foster parents was not clearly erroneous.” As to their parenting ability, although the trial court did not make any express findings on the matter, the record reflected “that there were ongoing issues related to their parenting ability. Respondents did not complete parenting classes, psychological evaluations, sign releases for their medications, or attend LC’s medical appointments.” In addition, they “frequently arrived late to parenting-time visits and there were indications that they were abusing substances prior to the visits. Given this record, respondents[’] parenting ability did not weigh against a finding that” terminating their rights was in LC’s best interests. The court next concluded that the trial court’s findings that “LC needed stability, permanence, and finality[,]” and that his foster family could provide stability and permanence, were supported by the termination hearing testimony. The foster parents were willing to adopt him, and he was placed with his biological siblings. The court also held that, considering the whole record, the trial court did not clearly err in “finding that the foster placement was more advantageous” than respondents’ home. The trial court concluded “there was a reasonable likelihood that LC would be physically abused or neglected if returned to” their care.