In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: H.B. and L.B. (Minor Children)

Indeianapolis, Indiana family law lawyer represented parents in a parental rights termination case.





[¶2] Mother and Father (collectively, Parents) are the married parents of sons, H.B., born February 2, 2019, and L.B., born December 18, 2020 (collectively, Children). Mother also has three adult children over the age of twenty.



[¶3] When H.B. was only a few months old, Father was charged with Level 5 felony intimidation. Father later pleaded guilty to the charge. Meanwhile, the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS) petitioned to find H.B. to be a child in need of services (CHINS). The juvenile court found H.B. to be a CHINS but later dismissed the case.



[¶4] After the birth of their youngest son, L.B., and less than two weeks after the closure of H.B.'s CHINS case, Mother allowed Father to come to the domestic violence shelter where she resided with Children. The visit resulted in a confrontation between Parents, which led DCS to remove Children from Parents' care and file another CHINS petition in May 2021. The CHINS petition alleged Parents had failed to provide Children with necessary food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education, or supervision.



[¶5] The juvenile court found Children to be CHINS due to Parents' domestic violence, their inability to provide safe housing, and Mother's substance abuse. Although Mother denied drug use, the court found that Mother had tested positive for methamphetamines and amphetamines recently and that L.B. had been born with amphetamines in his system. At the dispositional hearing, the court ordered Mother to participate in home-based therapy, case management, parenting education, substance abuse assessment and treatment, random drug screens, and domestic violence services. As for Father, the court ordered him to complete a parenting assessment, substance abuse assessment, random drug screens, domestic violence services, and father engagement services.



[¶6] Father was jailed for a drug-related offense from December 2021 to April 2022, when he was transferred to a work release program. For a brief period, Father had employment and re-engaged with Children. But he soon lapsed into noncompliance with the CHINS dispositional orders while also violating his probation. The latter resulted in Father's reincarceration.



[¶7] DCS petitioned to terminate the parental rights of both Mother and Father in March 2023. By the time of the termination hearing a year later, Children had lived in the same foster home for three years. When first placed, H.B., then two years old, had developmental delays and knew only about five words. The foster parents enrolled him in developmental preschool, which helped with his emotional regulation and speech. Both Children were thriving in the foster home, got along well with the foster parents' daughter, and were bonded to the foster family. The foster parents expressed their willingness to adopt Children.



[¶8] Father remained incarcerated at the time of the termination hearing as a result of his probation revocation. During his incarceration, Father had participated in Recovery While Incarcerated, a drug rehabilitation program, and the Inside-Out Dad Program aimed at helping incarcerated fathers improve their parenting skills. Father's earliest release date from his probation revocation matter was September 2026, but he had two outstanding warrants in other unresolved matters.



* * *



Legal issue Can a parent's rights be terminated for failing to remedy conditions of substance abuse, incarceration, and domestic violence affecting their children's welfare?

Headnote



FAMILY LAW. TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS. The case addresses the termination of parental rights of parents whose children were removed due to instability, domestic violence, and substance abuse issues, with the juvenile court finding substantial evidence to terminate the rights based on ongoing parental misconduct and the children's best interests.



CRIMINAL LAW. DUE PROCESS IN TERMINATION HEARINGS. An issue raised was whether the father's absence from a termination hearing constituted a deprivation of due process, considering the proceedings' remote nature and the father's subsequent choice not to participate further.



LEGAL PROCEDURE. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. The father alleged ineffective assistance of counsel due to non-objective actions at a hearing, requiring an assessment of whether representation failures critically impacted the termination proceedings' fairness.



FAMILY LAW. BEST INTERESTS AND FUTURE PLANS FOR CHILDREN. The court evaluated if termination served the children's best interests and if the proposed adoption by foster parents represented a satisfactory plan for their future care.



Key Phrases Termination of parental rights. Ineffective assistance of counsel. Domestic violence and substance abuse. Best interests of children. Satisfactory plan for care and treatment.

Affirmed