WILLIAM L. WOLLENBERG, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE.
These actions are brought by The Department of Children and Families ("DCF" or "Petitioner") seeking to terminate the parental rights of the biological mother and the biological father of Zaquiel G. (hereinafter referred to as "Zaquiel G." or "child"). The biological mother of this child is Keila C. (hereinafter referred to as "Keila C." or "Mother") and the biological father is Jesus G. (hereinafter referred to as "Jesus G." or "Father").
The court finds that there is no action pending in any other court affecting custody of this child and that this court has jurisdiction in this matter.
On 5/19/05 an Order of Temporary Custody and Petition of Alleged Neglect was filed by the Department of Children and Families, State of Connecticut in Superior Court for Juvenile Matters on behalf of the above-named child.
The allegations of the petition were neglect in that the child was being denied proper care and attention, physically, educationally, emotionally or morally and being permitted to live under conditions, circumstances or associations injurious to wellbeing.
On 5/27/06 Mother appeared and abode service was confirmed. Mother was advised, the OTC was sustained and specific steps/expectations were reviewed, accepted and ordered. 7/7/05 was set as a plea date for Father and 8/22/05 was set for a CSC.
CT Page 11451
On 7/7/05 service by publication was confirmed for Father; Father failed to appear and was defaulted.
On 10/4/06 a Neglect Trial was held. Father entered a plea of nolo contendere as to conditions injurious as to neglect and after trial neglect was found as to Mother as alleged. Indefinite commitment was ordered by the Court, the permanency plan of TPR and adoption was continued to the TPR trial and service was confirmed as to the TPR.
On 10/4/06 Specific Steps/Expectations were reviewed, approved and ordered as final steps. Also, a CMC was set for 12/13/06 at 9:00 a.m., at which time a TPR trial date was to be finalized.
On 3/12/07 the Court commenced trial for the TPR and Permanency Plan and both Mother and Father appeared at the courthouse.
At the time of trial the State submitted thirteen exhibits as follows:
Exhibit A — Social Study, dated 8/1/06
Exhibit B — Addendum to the Social Study, dated 3/2/07
Exhibit C — Dr. Franklin's Psychological Evaluation, dated 11/06
Exhibit D — Mariden Pediatric letter, dated 8/4/06
Exhibit E — CCMC Pulmonology letter, dated 12/4/06
Exhibit F — Father's Criminal Record
Exhibit G — Hartford Police Report, dated 6/4/06
Exhibit H — Hartford Police Report, dated 3/2/07
CT Page 11452
Exhibit I — Capital Region Mental Health Report, dated 2/1/07
Exhibit J — Klingberg Summ. Report, dated 3/5/07
Exhibit K — Multicultural Psych. Services Report, dated 7/31/06
Exhibit L Multicultural Psych. Services Report, dated 2/1/07
Exhibit M — Social Study, dated 5/9/06.
The child submitted two exhibits as follows:
Exhibit 1 — Child's Medical Regime
Exhibit 2 — Letter from Nicole Diaz, dated 3/11/07
The State called five witnesses and the Respondent Mother called two witnesses. At the conclusion of testimony and statements by counsel with regard to a position, the court stated that a written decision would be forthcoming. The grounds of this petition for the Termination of Parental Rights to the biological Mother, Keila C., and biological Father, Jesus G., are Failure to Rehabilitate. The court has applied the burden of proof applicable to the Termination of Parental Rights petitions, and the exhibits that were submitted in evidence. The court has utilized the applicable legal standards in considering the evidence and the testimony of any witnesses.
I FACTUAL FINDINGS A. Background and Present Situation
On 5/19/05, an Order of Temporary Custody and Petition of Alleged Neglect was filed by the Department of Children and Families, State of CT Page 11453 Connecticut in Superior Court Juvenile Matters on behalf of the above-named child.
On 5/25/06, a hearing to Review the Permanency Plan and to obtain an adjudication on the existing Order of Temporary Custody was held but continued to 6/27/06 as the parents' attorney filed Objections to the Permanency Plan of Termination of Parental Rights. The judge also ordered that the TPR Petitions be filed as soon as possible.
The presenting problems with this family are substance abuse and domestic violence in the presence of the children; mental health concerns, cognitive limitations, concerns with parenting ability; Mother's inability to protect children or address their special needs; Mother's history of transience; Father's ongoing criminal involvement; and Mother's inability to parent.
Zaquiel G. currently resides in a legal risk, medically complex foster home. He is thriving in that household and has made great strides developmentally and with weight gain. He is now walking and saying words. However, he continues to struggle with his asthma and is allergic to polyester and penicillin. Most recently he has presented with fluctuating blood glucose levels and is being evaluated by a team of endocrinologists at CCMC.
Mother, Keila C., has previous DCF involvement due to an open case involving her two older children, Destiny C., age 3 and Jesus G., age 2. Both children reside in foster homes, with a current plan of TPR and Adoption. Keila C. has a history of transience, significant mental health concerns, domestic violence, and failure to comply with providers. At the time of Zaquiel G.'s birth, Mother had been discharged from all programs to which she was referred except visitation services and the parenting support group at Klingberg Family Centers. Pre-natal providers at both St. Francis and Hartford Hospital reported concerns regarding Mother's inconsistency with required care during her pregnancy.
On 3/7/05, Jesus G., Zaquiel G.'s putative Father, allegedly kicked Mother in the abdomen. During the evening of 3/8/05, Mother entered Hartford Hospital and reported that she had bleeding/discharge that caused concerns regarding her unborn child's health. She was placed on bed rest and listed in the hospital under an assumed name for security reasons. Mother remained in the hospital for four days while Zaquiel G. was treated with steroids to ensure lung function should he be delivered pre-term. Upon her discharge on 3/11/05, Mother was offered a bed at a domestic violence shelter but she refused and reported that she would be CT Page 11454 going to live with her mother, Ana F. When the social worker contacted Ana F. regarding this plan, she reported that she was unaware that Keila C. was planning to live with her.
On 5/16/05, Keila C. delivered Zaquiel G. with no reported complications. Mother was unable to present an adequate plan for her new infant's care and this, along with her previous history, led to the infant's removal from her care via an Administrative Hold on 5/18/05.
B. Mother, Keila C.
Keila C. was born on 4/14/83 in Worcester, Massachusetts, the oldest child of Ana F., and Luis C. She has two older half-siblings from her mother, Analuz L., born on 8/30/70, and Wilfredo ("Jerry") C., born on 11/05/78. Keila C. has a biological brother, Luis C., who was born on 5/28/84, and is currently residing in a group home in Bloomfield through the Department of Mental Retardation.
Mother's birth family has a history with the Department of Children and Families dating back to at least 1995. According to DCF records, Keila C.'s mother, Ana F., stated that Keila C. was developmentally delayed, in that she did not meet developmental milestones in a timely manner, including walking and talking. Ana F. divorced Keila C.'s father in 1991 after a long separation due to his involvement with drugs, alcohol, and women. Ana F., Keila C. and her younger brother moved to Puerto Rico and returned to Connecticut when she was ten years old.
Mother attended high school in Hartford, CT, but only completed the 9th grade. While in 10th grade, Mother was raped by an older man and conceived her daughter, Destiny. She dropped out of high school due to her pregnancy and did not return. She has had four pregnancies to date, the second of which she miscarried. During this time she attempted suicide on several occasions.
Note: See Exhibit C — Dr. Franklin's Psychological Evaluation, dated 11/06 for an extensive history of Mother.
C. Father, Jesus G.
Jesus G. was born on 12/25/83, to Minerva S. and Marino G., in Caguas, Puerto Rico, the youngest of six children. He moved to Hartford with his family when he was six months old. Father's family of origin has an extensive child protective services history in Connecticut dating back to 1987, and in Puerto Rico dating back to 1976. Issues in the family have included emotional problems, learning disabilities, intellectual CT Page 11455 limitations, physical/educational neglect, sexual abuse and criminal behavior.
Department records report that as a child, Jesus G. had been diagnosed with Conduct Disorder, Mild Mental Retardation and Cannabis Abuse. He has a history of aggressive acts, and an extensive criminal record that includes several Larceny charges, Criminal Trespass, Risk of Injury to a Minor, and Reckless Driving. He has had multiple incarcerations with the most recent being 3/2/07 for Assault 3.
Jesus G. was committed to DCF as a child and had several residential placements, including Lake Grove, St. Francis Care Behavioral, and Riverview Hospital. He attended special education classes and reached the 11th grade while at St. Francis.
D. Child, Zaquiel G.
Zaquiel G. was born to Keila C. and Jesus G. on 5/16/05. He has severe asthma, eczema, and is allergic to 100% polyester and penicillin. He is currently being evaluated for diabetes based on recent extreme fluctuations in his blood glucose levels. He is slightly advanced developmentally and is walking and beginning to talk in phrases. He is currently placed in a pre-adoptive foster home that is also a licensed medically complex home.
Note: See Exhibit C — Dr. Franklin's Psychological Evaluation, dated 11/06 for an extensive history of Zaquiel G.
E. Relatives
Ana L., maternal aunt, resides with her husband, Francisco, and three children in Port Charlotte, FL. She previously resided in West Hartford, CT and desired to be a permanent placement resource for Zaquiel G's older siblings, Destiny and Jesus. Parental rights to Destiny and Jesus were terminated on 11/25/05 and they were placed with Ana L. in Florida on 3/10/06 through the Interstate Compact process as a pre-adoptive home. She has stated to DCF that she is not able to be a placement resource for Zaquiel G.
Wilfredo C., maternal uncle, resides in Worcester, MA. Placement with him was explored through Interstate Compact office. Reportedly, during the time of the household's evaluation by Massachusetts DSS, Wilfredo C. and his paramour had become a resource for several of her relatives in an in-state CPS case. Massachusetts DSS refused placement on the basis of insufficient space in the home. CT Page 11456
Ana F., maternal grandmother, resides in Hartford, CT. She was reportedly the primary caregiver for Destiny for much of the child's early life, and has expressed an interest in becoming a resource for the children. However, she is not considered an appropriate candidate due to her own significant child protective history and her conflicting, and often violent relationship with Keila C.
F. Present Situation
On 10/12/06, Zaquiel G. had an allergy appointment with Dr. K. Mother, her boyfriend and Zaquiel G.'s foster parents were present. Dr. K. scheduled a follow up visit for 11/2/06. The DCF social worker and Zaquiel G.'s foster mother attended this appointment. Although she was notified of this appointment, Mother did not attend.
Due to Zaquiel G.'s severe asthma, which has caused him to be labeled as medically complex, a pulmonology appointment was made with Dr. B. at CCMC for 11/20/06 at 10:00 a.m. Mother was notified of this appointment via phone as well as in writing. At 11:00 a.m. on 11/20/06, Mother came to the DCF office requesting to speak with the case worker. She stated that she was seeking help with obtaining a dining room set. At this time, Mother asked the social worker when Zaquiel G.'s "asthma appointment" was scheduled. The social worker informed Mother that the appointment had been scheduled for 10:00 a.m. that morning. Mother stated that she had forgotten that the appointment was scheduled for 11/20/06.
Zaquiel G. was scheduled to attend a sweat test at the UCONN Health Center on 12/18/06 to rule out Cystic Fibrosis. Mother was notified of this appointment but she did not attend.
On 2/13/07, after several unsuccessful attempts to contact father, Jesus G., via phone, DCF sent him a letter informing him that a referral had been made for him to attend a substance abuse evaluation, and that in order for an appointment to be made, he would need to sign a release of information or he would need to call ADRC directly. Father contacted DCF approximately a week later and left a voice mail indicating his displeasure with DCF accusing him of using drugs and further indicating that he had already submitted to random urine screens for his probation. The social worker attempted to return Father's call but was unsuccessful.
On 3/6/07, DCF received a phone call from the Klingberg worker, Oscar P. who supervises Father's visits with his son. He indicated that Father CT Page 11457 had cancelled his visit for the day, stating that he had been arrested over the weekend and had to go to probation. A police check indicated that Father had been arrested for Assault 3, and that the charges were still pending.
Zaquiel G. continues to reside in a DCF legal-risk foster home. His foster parents have expressed a desire to adopt him should he become legally free, and have committed to caring for him on a long-term basis. He continues to require significant attention with regard to his health issues. He appears to be well-adjusted in his placement, and has formed a positive relationship with all members of the family. Zaquiel G. is becoming increasingly verbal, and is speaking in both Spanish and English.
II TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS ADJUDICATION
The court must determine whether the proof provides clear and convincing evidence that a pleaded ground exists to terminate Mother, Keila C's and Father, Jesus G.'s parental rights as of the date of the filing of the petition.
A. Reasonable Efforts Finding
Unless a court has found in an earlier proceeding that efforts to reunify are no longer appropriate, DCF, in order to terminate parental rights, initially must show by clear and convincing evidence that it "has made reasonable efforts to locate the parent and to reunify Zaquiel G. with his parents, unless the court finds in this proceeding that the parents are unable or unwilling to benefit from reunification efforts." C.G.S. Sec. 17a-112(j)(1). "Reasonable efforts means doing everything reasonable, not everything possible." In re Jessica B., 50 Conn.App. 554, 566, 718 A.2d 997 (1998).
Reasonable efforts to reunify Zaquiel G. with Keila C. are no longer appropriate because Mother has been offered services, some of with which she has complied and others with which she has not participated, such as domestic violence classes. While she has enough cognitive ability to complete a parenting class, she is incapable of applying what she has learned to a given situation. She is solely dependent on her boyfriend for survival and given her mental instability and history of transience, if the relationship should end, there are concerns that Mother would be unable to care for herself and Zaquiel G. Jesus G. has engaged in services and has been somewhat compliant, however, he has no financial CT Page 11458 means to care for Zaquiel G. and continues to involve himself in criminal activity that results in his incarceration.
DCF has been involved with this family since 2003. The presenting problems with this family are Keila C.'s history of transience, significant mental health concerns, domestic violence, and failure to comply with providers. At the time of Zaquiel G.'s birth, she had been discharged from all programs to which she had been referred apart from visitation services and a parenting support group at Klingberg Family Centers. Prenatal providers at both St. Francis and Hartford Hospital reported concerns with Mother's inconsistency with required care during her pregnancy and domestic violence between Mother and Jesus G. which resulted in Mother's hospitalization for four days while Zaquiel G. was treated with steroids to ensure lung function should he have been born pre-term. Upon her discharge on 3/11/05, Mother was referred to a domestic violence shelter but she refused services. At that time, she had not been able to present an adequate plan for her new infant's care which, along with her previous history, resulted in Zaquiel G.'s removal from her care via an Administrative Hold on 5/18/05.
The following reasonable and active efforts were made to reunify the child with his Mother, Keila C.: DCF case management; transportation assistance/bus passes; psychological/interactional evaluation with Dr. Derek F.; parenting classes at Klingberg; supportive housing at Chrysalis Center; psychiatric evaluation with Dr. K., assistance with DMR referral; individual/group counseling/parenting group — HERS program; individual/group counseling — Center for Multicultural Psychological Services; supervised visitation program — Klingberg Family Centers; supportive housing — My Sister's Place II; shelter placement — My Sister's Place.
The following reasonable and active efforts were made to reunify the child with his Father, Jesus G.: DCF case management; transportation assistance/bus passes; psychological/interactional evaluation with Dr. Derek F.; supervised visitation program — Klingberg Family Centers; parenting classes — Klingberg Family Centers; substance abuse program — UCONN medical through parole officer; individual/parenting group — Capitol Region Mental Health.
Neither Keila C. nor Jesus G. are employed and Mother does not have stable housing.
Father has an extensive criminal record.
Jesus G. has not parented any of his children on a regular basis. CT Page 11459 Placement of the parents' two older children has been transferred to other relatives because of mental health, domestic violence and many other issues.
Mother and Father are unwilling or unable to benefit from reunification services in that they have not participated in services provided by the Department in order for them to rehabilitate to such a degree as to provide adequate care for their child.
In addition, DCF has made reasonable efforts to achieve the Permanency Plan.
B. Grounds for the Termination: Failure to Rehabilitate — General Statutes § 17a-112(j)(3)(E) — as to biological Mother, Keila C. and biological Father, Jesus G. The Commissioner has alleged as a ground for termination that the parents have failed to rehabilitate themselves after their child had been adjudicated as neglected. This ground for termination, based upon a prior adjudication of neglect and a failure of personal rehabilitation, is clearly articulated in our statutes. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-112(j)(3)(E) states in part that:
[t]he Superior Court . . . may grant a petition [to terminate parental rights] if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that . . . the child under the age of seven years . . . has been found by the Superior Court to have been neglected . . . in a prior proceeding . . . and the parent . . . has failed to achieve such degree of personal rehabilitation as would encourage the belief that within a reasonable time, considering the age and needs of the child, such parent could assume a responsible position in the life of the child and such parent's parental rights of another child were previously terminated pursuant to a petition filed by the Commissioner of Child and Families.
"Personal rehabilitation as used in [Section 17a-112] refers to the restoration of a parent to his or her former constructive and useful role as a parent . . . [The statute] requires the trial court . . . to find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the level of rehabilitation [she] has achieved, if any, falls short of that which would reasonably CT Page 11460 encourage a belief that at some future date [she] can assume a responsible position in [her] child's life. (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Eden F., 250 Conn. 674, 706, 741 A.2d 873 (1999) . . . [I]n assessing rehabilitation, the critical issue is not whether the parent has improved [her] ability to manage [her] own life, but rather whether [she] has gained the ability to care for the particular needs of the child at issue." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Sarah Ann K., 57 Conn.App. 441, 448, 749 A.2d 77 (2000). See also In re Ashley S., 61 Conn.App. 658, 665, 769 A.2d 718, 718, cert. denied, 255 Conn. 950, 769 A.2d 61 (2001); In re Alejandro L., 91 Conn.App. 248, 259, 881 A.2d 450 (2005).
Whether the age and needs of the child would support allowance of further time for the parent to rehabilitate must also be considered. In re Luis C., supra. 210 Conn. 157, 167-68, 5545 A.2d 722 (1989). The reasonableness of the time period within which rehabilitation is sought to be accomplished is a question of fact for the court. In re Davon M., 16 Conn.App. 693, 696, 548 A.2d 1350 (1988). Also, in determining whether further allowance of a reasonable period of time would promote rehabilitation, a court can consider efforts made since the date of the filing of the petition to terminate parental rights. In re Sarah M., 19 Conn.App. 371, 377, 562 A.2d 566 (1989).
Several aspects of the clear and convincing evidence in this case compel the conclusion that the parents have yet to achieve a sufficient "level of rehabilitation . . . which would reasonably encourage a belief that at some future date [she] can assume a responsible position in [her child's lives]." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Sarah Ann K., 57 Conn.App. 441, 448, 749 A.2d 77 (2000). See In re Alejandro L., 91 Conn.App. 248, 259, 881 A.2d 450 (2005); In re Ashley S., 61 Conn.App. 658, 665, 769 A.2d 718, cert. denied, 255 Conn. 950, 769 A.2d 61 (2001). The credible evidence in this case, presented through the TPR social study and exhibits, clearly and convincingly establishes that Keila C. and Jesus G. have not achieved C.G.S. § 17a-112(j)(3)(E) rehabilitation. The court credits the DCF reports which show that the parents have been unable to achieve their rehabilitation.
Ground E — Failure to Rehabilitate as to biological Mother, Keila C.
At and prior to the time of commitment of the child, contributing factors in the neglect of the child were the parents' chronic substance abuse, mental health issues, lack of parenting skills, and lack of housing and income that negatively impacted their ability to provide appropriate care for their child. CT Page 11461
On 10/4/06, Zaquiel G. was adjudicated neglected and was committed to the care and custody of the Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families.
The Respondents were advised by the Court and the Petitioner on numerous occasions that they needed to address their problems with substance abuse, mental health, domestic violence, criminal conduct, and homelessness. Mother needs to become more independent so that if her relationship with Jose S. should end, she would be able to adequately care for herself and Zaquiel G. She seems unable to process cognitively what she has learned in parenting classes and apply it to the care of her son, who has specialized needs. Jesus G. needs to refrain from getting involved in criminal activity that leads to his incarceration.
On 5/23/06, the parents were given the following court expectations which were made final expectations on 10/4/06. Neither parent has consistently followed through with these expectations.
Keep whereabouts known to DCF and your attorney.
Mother has resided with several different friends and with her mother at times. Due to her transience there have been periods where DCF and providers had difficulty locating her. The Department is currently aware of Mother's whereabouts at this time because on 4/1/06 she obtained an apartment with her boyfriend, Jose S.
Father was incarcerated from 7/18/05 to 10/3/05. He did not initially contact DCF as he had agreed to do upon his release, but did make his whereabouts known in January 2005. He then became whereabouts unknown from 5/23/06 until 6/16/06, when DCF checked the Department of Corrections web site and found that Father was re-incarcerated as of 6/5/06. He was released on 9/26/06, and rearrested on 3/2/07.
Participate in counseling and make progress toward the identified treatment goals. Parenting X; Individual X; Family ___
The Department has confirmed with Mother's therapist at Multicultural Psychological Services that she attends her individual therapy approximately twice a month, sees the nurse monthly for medicine management, and sees the psychiatrist quarterly at the Center for Multicultural Psychological Services. The therapist reported that she is making some progress toward her goals but has not been specific. Mother has completed two parenting classes at Klingberg Family Centers, CT Page 11462 however, it appears that while she is able to cognitively absorb new information, she is unable to apply what she has learned. She is incapable at this time to make crucial decisions concerning her child's basic care (i.e., feeding, presenting him with toys and clothes to which he is highly allergic, inability to administer medication), even when given instructions. There are also concerns that she might not be able to recognize when Zaquiel G.'s asthma exacerbates, requiring emergency medical treatment.
Father has been diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and intermittent Explosive Disorder, and although he is not on any medication at this time, he was previously scheduled to see his psychiatrist once every three months but was unwilling to attend. His counselor at Capital Region Mental Health had mixed reports with regard to his participation.
Obtain and/or cooperate with a restraining/protective order and/or other appropriate safety plan as approved by DCF to avoid further domestic violence incidents. Mother filed for a restraining order on 10/22/04 after reporting that Jesus G. had threatened to harm her. The restraining order lapsed on 11/2/04 when Mother failed to appear at the required hearing. She was advised to file again but did not.
Secure and maintain adequate housing and legal income.
Father has not obtained employment and is ineligible to receive SSI. He had not been actively looking for employment and has been incarcerated at times. Prior to his incarceration, he resided with his mother, who also has a prior history with the Department.
No involvement/further involvement with the criminal justice system. Cooperate with the Office of Adult Probation or parole officer and comply with conditions of probation or parole. Father was incarcerated at Hartford Correctional Institution from 7/18/05 to 10/3/05 for Assault 3. Upon his release he was given 18 months' probation. He was incarcerated on 6/5/06 and was held at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Facility in Enfield, CT for three months after which he was released. He was arrested again on 3/2/07 for Assault 3.
Visit children as often as DCF permits and CT Page 11463 demonstrate appropriate parent/child interaction during visits.
Mother has been compliant with attending weekly visitations with Zaquiel G. and she interacts fairly well with the child. However, there have been some concerns regarding her parental judgment in caring for him during the visits. On one occasion, instead of feeding him by spoon as instructed, she placed regular baby food in Zaquiel G.'s formula bottle and proceeded to feed him. When he continued to cry, she decided he wasn't hungry, despite the length of time he had not eaten. She did not check to see if any liquid was coming from the bottle and did not enlarge the nipple hole on the bottle. On another occasion, she was instructed to apply medication to an infected part of Zaquiel G.'s body and instead placed the cream in other areas that could have caused him to break out as he has highly sensitive skin and extreme eczema. On two occasions she had given Zaquiel G. clothing and toys made out of polyester despite repeatedly being told that he is allergic to polyester.
Father began attending visits with Mother on 7/16/04, after his release from prison. He attended 4 of 5 possible visits at the DCF office before the visits were moved to Klingberg. He appeared to have only marginal interest in engaging his child during these visits. On 8/13/04 Father was escorted out of the office by security after engaging an uninvolved worker, who had passed the visitation room, in an argument and ultimately threatening him. Father attended two visits at Klingberg with Mother before the visits were separated at Mother's request on 8/31/04. Father attended 12 of 24 possible visits with his son, Jesus, once the visits were separated. On 3/9/05, visitation between Father and his son were suspended due to safety concerns surrounding the 3/7/05 alleged domestic violence incident, and Father's renewed police involvement and incarceration in July 2005 on Assault 3 charges. After his release on 10/3/05, his visits resumed on 1/25/06 at Klingberg Family Centers and included Jesus and Zaquiel G., until Jesus was placed with a maternal aunt in Florida in March 2006. Visitation from 5/22/06 to the present has been nonexistent due to Father's incarceration and other issues.
Mother attended administrative case reviews on 7/7/05, 12/28/05 and 6/20/06, and has received treatment plans that provided her continuation participation in individual therapy, additional psychological and/or DMR evaluations, and continued visitation which would have transitioned to the home, starting on 7/26/06. Father was whereabouts unknown during the administrative case reviews held on 7/7/05, 12/28/05 and 6/20/06, and therefore did not attend. CT Page 11464
In December 2004, the Petitioner referred Mother to My Sister's Place for a shelter bed and My Sister's Place, Chrysalis, and DMR for supportive housing, but she refused services. On 3/11/05, Mother was offered a bed in a domestic violence shelter upon her discharge from Hartford Hospital after the birth of Zaquiel G. but she refused this referral as well.
On 5/10/04, Mother was referred to parenting classes at New Beginnings but due to her failure to show for appointments, the provider was later changed to Urban League HERS Program, where she was referred for individual and group counseling. It was reported by staff that Mother's attendance was sporadic but when she did attend, she was an active participant and the program reported moderate progress.
On 7/21/05, Mother began individual therapy at Multicultural Psychological Services (MPS). The DCF social worker spoke with Mother's therapist in February 2006 at which time she reported that Mother was attending her therapy sessions twice a month and that she was seeing the psychiatrist every other month for medication management. When asked to explain in detail how Mother had met her treatment goals, the therapist was unable to give an adequate answer except that Mother was making progress toward reaching her goals.
On 7/13/05, Mother participated in a court-ordered psychological evaluation with Zaquiel G.'s older siblings, Destiny C., aged 4, and Jesus G., aged 2, conducted by Dr. Derek F. Dr. Derek F. reported a diagnostic impression of Mother that included Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Dependent Personality Traits, and a Learning Disorder. He recommended that "the court explore termination of Ms. C.'s parenting involvement" because it would take an extensive amount of time for her to demonstrate parental skill due to her long history of mental illness. He also stated that "Ms. C.'s level of functioning exceeds concerns identified in an earlier psychiatric evaluation dated July 14, 2004 by Dr. David K."
After some initial resistance, Jesus C. began attending a parenting group and having parent aide assisted visits with Zaquiel G.'s older brother, Jesus, at Klingberg Family Centers on 9/7/04. He attended 12 out of 24 classes, before the visits were suspended due Father's outstanding arrest warrant for domestic violence regarding Keila C. After his release from prison in October 2005, he began supervised visits with Zaquiel G. at Klingberg between 1/25/06 and 5/22/06 and attended 9 out of 14 sessions. Klingberg staff report that Father would often arrive late for his visits but his interaction with Zaquiel G. was CT Page 11465 appropriate.
Father was referred to Capitol Region Mental Health for individual therapy and parenting and he began these services on 12/29/06. His case manager reported that he was more compliant with attending his parenting group than individual therapy sessions. He missed 9 individual therapy appointments out of 19. He was scheduled to meet with the psychiatrist every 3 months and has missed 3 appointments since January. The case manager told DCF that Father had attended his therapy sessions more consistently until he was incarcerated on 6/5/06.
Mother and Father have not always been compliant with informing DCF of their whereabouts. Mother has resided with several different friends and with her mother at times. Due to this transience there have been periods when the Department and providers had difficulty locating her. The Department is currently aware of Mother's whereabouts because on 4/1/06 she obtained an apartment with her boyfriend, Jose S.
Father was incarcerated from 7/18/05 to 10/3/05 for a conviction of Assault 3. He did not initially contact the Department as he agreed to do upon discharge on 10/3/05, but the DCF has known of his whereabouts since December 2005. Upon his release he was referred for individual therapy and a parenting group and he was moderately compliant with attendance. However, on 6/5/06, Father was incarcerated for Kidnapping 2, which charge was changed to Conspiracy 1, and he was held at MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution until 9/26/06. He was arrested again on 3/2/07 for Assault 3.
Father recently told the Department that he wanted to care for Zaquiel G. even though he acknowledged that he does not have any income and that when released, he will go back to living with his mother, who has a DCF history.
Zaquiel G. is 22 months old and has spent 22 months in foster care. He has specialized needs in that he requires multiple breathing treatments and constant monitoring due to asthma. He has highly sensitive skin, eczema and is allergic to penicillin and 100% polyester. He is also being evaluated for diabetes due to recent fluctuations in his blood glucose levels. Continued foster care is detrimental to his development; he now requires a permanent, safe home and the people he recognizes as his family are willing to be a permanent placement for him.
For more than one year, despite the services offered, the parents have failed to demonstrate such a degree of personal rehabilitation as would encourage the belief that within a reasonable amount of time, CT Page 11466 considering their child's age and needs, they could assume a responsible position in the life of their child. Mother is cognitively unable to meet Zaquiel G.'s specialized needs and Father who is constantly being incarcerated and involved otherwise with the criminal justice system, is not physically present nor financially able to care for Zaquiel G.
Summary of Adjudicatory Findings
This court has found that the Commissioner has proved the following adjudicatory grounds by clear and convincing evidence: (1) that Father, Jesus G., and Mother, Keila C., have failed to rehabilitate.
III DISPOSITION
Except in the case where termination is based on consent, if grounds have been found to terminate parental rights, applying the appropriate standard of proof the court must then consider whether the facts as of the last day of trial, establish, by clear and convincing evidence, after consideration of the factors enumerated in C.G.S. § 17a-112(k), that termination is in the children's best interest. If the court does find that termination is in the children's best interest, an order will enter terminating parental rights.
A. C.G.S. § 17a-112(k) Criteria
The court has found by clear and convincing evidence that the statutory grounds alleged by DCF for the termination of parental rights have been proven.
Before making a decision whether or not to terminate Jesus G.'s and Keila C.'s parental rights, as they did not consent, the court will consider and make findings on each of the seven criteria set forth in C.G.S. § 17a-112(k). In re Romance M., 229 Conn. 345, 355, 641 A.2d 378 (1994).
These criteria and this court's findings, which have been established by clear and convincing evidence, are as follows:
1. "The timeliness, nature and extent of services offered or provided to the parent and the child by an agency to facilitate the reunion of the child with the parent." CT Page 11467
This court finds by clear and convincing evidence that DCF has made reasonable efforts to reunify Zaquiel G. with his parents. Those services were ordered in a timely manner and were appropriate for the circumstances at hand.
Considered carefully, the clear and convincing evidence shows that DCF offered timely, appropriate and comprehensive services to the respondent parents to facilitate their reunification with their child and made reasonable efforts to reunite them with their child. In re Victoria B., 79 Conn.App. 245, 258-60, 829 A.2d 855 (2003).
Based on this clear and convincing evidence of the circumstances now present in this case, the court finds that the parents are unable and/or unwilling to benefit from reasonable reunification efforts. C.G.S. § 17a-112(j)(1). Their serious issues clearly and convincingly make them unable and/or unwilling to benefit from reasonable reunification efforts. In re Tyqwane V., 85 Conn.App. 528, 535-36, 857 A.2d 963 (2004).
2. "Whether DCF has made reasonable efforts to reunite the family pursuant to the Federal Child Welfare Act of 1980, as amended."
This court finds that the clear and convincing evidence in this matter proves that the parents are presently unable and/or unwilling to benefit from such reunification services as were contemplated by the federal Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, as amended.
DCF has previously offered services to the respondent parents.
3. "The terms of any court order entered into and agreed upon by any individual or agency and the parent, and the extent to which all the parties have fulfilled their obligations of such order." The clear and convincing evidence indicates that the parents have failed to fully comply with most of the steps ordered by the court.
4. "The feelings and emotional ties of the child with respect to his parents, any guardian of such child's person and any person who has exercised physical care, custody or control of the child for at least one year and with whom the child has developed significant emotional ties." CT Page 11468
The child has been able to exhibit only limited bonding with his parents based on a condition that was due to the parents' inability and/or reluctance to accept their role as parents.
5. "The age of the child."
Zaquiel G. was born on 5/16/05 and is 22 months old.
6. "The efforts the parent has made to adjust such parent's circumstances, conduct or conditions to make it in the best interest of the child to return to such child's home in the foreseeable future, including, but not limited to (A) the extent to which the parent has maintained contact with the child as part of an effort to reunite the child with the parent provided that the court may give weight to incidental visitations, communications or contributions and (B) the maintenance of regular contact or communication with the guardian or other custodian of the child." The court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the parents have not made realistic and sustained efforts to conform their conduct to minimally acceptable parental standards.
The clear and convincing evidence indicates that they have refused to cooperate with DCF or programs presented.
The court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parents have not made the changes necessary in their lifestyle that would indicate that they would be safe, responsible and nurturing parents for Zaquiel G. To permit the child to return to the parents' care would compromise the safety of the child.
7. "The extent to which a parent has been prevented from maintaining a meaningful relationship with the child by the unreasonable act or conduct of the other parent of the child, or the unreasonable act of any other person or by the economic circumstances of the parent."
This court finds by clear and convincing evidence that no unreasonable conduct by DCF, foster parents, Department of Corrections or third parties prevented the parents from maintaining a relationship with CT Page 11469 Zaquiel G., nor did their economic circumstances prevent such relationship, although the limitations and restrictions inherent in the foster care system remained in effect.
B. Best Interest of the Child — C.G.S. § 17a-112(j)(2)
The court is next called upon to determine whether termination of Keila C.'s and Jesus G.'s parental rights to Zaquiel G. would be in his best interests. Applying the appropriate legal standards to the clear and convincing facts of this case, the court finds this issue in favor of the State of Connecticut and DCF.
The final element of the termination of parental rights statute, CGS § 17a-112(j), requires that before granting a duly noticed petition for such termination, the court must find. "by clear and convincing evidence . . . — (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child . . ."
"Termination of parental rights means the complete severance by court order of the legal relationship, with all its rights and responsibilities, between the child and the child's parent or parents . . . Termination of parental rights is a most serious and sensitive judicial action. In re Barbara J., 215 Conn. 31, 44, 574 A.2d 203 (1990)." (Citation omitted, internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Steven N., 57 Conn.App. 629, 632, 749 A.2d 678 (2000). "[T]he question . . . to be decided in a dispositional phase is whether it is in the best interests of the child to sever the parent-child relationship. That is different from the question of who should have custody of the child if termination of parental rights is determined to be in the best interests of the child. See Practice Book § 33-5." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Carissa K., 55 Conn.App. 768, 776, 740 A.2d 896 (1999). "In making this determination, the trial court can consider all events occurring prior to the date of the dispositional hearing, including those occurring after the filing of the termination petition." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Kasheema L., 56 Conn.App. 484, 488, 744 A.2d 441, cert. denied, 252 Conn. 945, 747 A.2d 522 (2000).
In determining whether termination of the parents' parental rights would be in the child's best interests, the court has examined multiple relevant factors, including the child's interests in sustained growth, development, well-being, stability and continuity of his environments; his length of stay in foster care; the nature of his relationship with his biological parents; and the degree of contact maintained with his biological parents. In re Alexander C., 60 Conn.App. 555, 559, 760 A.2d 532 (2000); In re Shyina B., 58 Conn.App. 159, 167, 752 A.2d 1139 (2000); In re Savanna M., 55 Conn.App. 807, 816, 740 A.2d 484 (1999). In a matter such as this, the court is further called upon to balance Zaquiel G.'s intrinsic needs for stability and permanency against the benefits of maintaining a connection with his parents. See Pamela B. v. Ment, 244 Conn. 296, 314, 709 A.2d 1089 (1998) (child's physical and emotional well-being must be weighed against the interest in preserving family integrity).
"[T]he genetic bond shared by a biological parent and his or her child, although not determinative of the issue of the best interest of the child, is certainly a factor to consider." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) In re Savanna M., 55 Conn.App. 807, 816, 740 A.2d 484 (1999).
Under such scrutiny, the clear and convincing evidence in this matter establishes that it is not in Zaquiel G.'s best interests to continue to maintain any legal relationship with his parents.
Since 7/1/05, Zaquiel G. has been residing in a legal risk pre-adoptive home as his Mother initially made no attempt to provide for his care nor did she consistently address her housing needs and mental health issues. This foster home is also licensed as a medically complex home, as Zaquiel G. has severe asthma and has been diagnosed with eczema. He also has extremely sensitive skin and is allergic to 100% polyester. Zaquiel G. is developmentally advanced for his age. The foster family has reported to the Department that they want to continue to be an adoptive resource for this child. A DCF social worker who met the foster family, witnessed their nurture of, and commitment to, Zaquiel G. As he has been in their home since birth, he is bonded to the family, especially the foster parents. They are directly responsible for CT Page 11470 his advanced development as they take significant time to help him with his speech and movement.
Keila C. has mental health issues and cognitive limitations, including a current diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression, recurrent, severe, with psychotic features; low average to borderline cognitive functioning (IQ 64); mild mental retardation; symptoms associated with Conduct Disorder, Attention Deficit Disorder and Hyperactivity and a learning disability. She is has been the victim of multiple incidents of sexual assault and involved in domestic violence incidents, which she has failed to address. She has a history of transience with her children, often residing in multiple homes of friends and family members who themselves have a history with the Department. Keila C. has only marginally addressed these issues and it may take a significant amount of time for her to work through all of them.
Meanwhile, Zaquiel G. continues to grow older and is thriving in a home where he has resided since birth. The foster mother, who is a nurse, is responsible for diagnosing his severe asthma and the foster family has the resources and parental judgment to successfully parent Zaquiel G. To remove him from the people he recognizes as his parents, could be detrimental to his development. Zaquiel G. looks healthy but the reality is that he has severe asthma which requires him at times to have breathing treatments at least 3 times a week.
The Department has concerns that Keila C.'s lack of judgment, especially as it relates to adequately addressing Zaquiel G.'s needs, could cause him harm and therefore, they do not advocate that he return to Mother's care. She loves Zaquiel G. and desires to have him back in her care but she is incapable of making crucial decisions concerning his basic care despite the fact that she has completed parenting classes. It is apparent that when she attends classes, she is unable to mentally process the information and apply it to a situation. The following are examples of Keila C.'s lack of parental judgment which could have been potentially harmful to Zaquiel G.:
On 1/4/06, Keila C. placed jar baby food inside of Zaquiel G.'s formula bottle after being informed that he should be fed by spoon. She was given the food, bowl and spoon, along with instructions for feeding her son from the foster parent. The parent aide supervising the visit was present to translate. Keila C. then proceeded to feed Zaquiel G. the bottle while he was crying profusely. She did not check to see if any liquid was coming out of the bottle and did not enlarge the hole in the nipple of the bottle; she also did not attempt to feed him the baby food CT Page 11471 by spoon as instructed. Rather, she assumed that Zaquiel G. was not hungry and no longer attempted to feed him. The visit, including transportation, had a duration of four hours.
On 2/15/06, Keila C. was told (via a note from the foster mother translated by parent aide) that Zaquiel G. had an infection on his penis and that she should apply a prescription cream only to the infected area when she changed his diaper. When Zaquiel G. returned from his visit, the foster mother found that he had the cream all over his back, buttocks, and penis and very little on the actual infected area. The child has severe eczema and sensitive skin and this mishap could have prompted an allergic reaction or caused an exacerbation of his eczema.
On 3/1/06, at the end of the visit, Keila C. gave Zaquiel G., aged 10 months, an Easter basket that contained toys for children over the age of 3 (which had warning labels stating so), candy, and a stuffed animal made out of 100% polyester, to which he is highly allergic.
On 4/20/06, Zaquiel G.'s foster mother reported that when he came home from a visit with his Keila C., she sent him back with an outfit made of 100% polyester. She confirmed this and stated that she had forgotten about his allergy.
In addition, Keila C., who has a history of transience, is currently living with her boyfriend upon whom she depends for all decision-making. Should this relationship fail, the Department believes that Keila C. would be unable to adequately care for herself and Zaquiel G. and would risk going back to a transient lifestyle. This would place Zaquiel G. in an unsafe environment. Keila C. has no family support should she find herself having to raise Zaquiel G. alone as she has a hostile relationship with maternal grandmother.
Zaquiel G.'s father, Jesus G., has been incarcerated on several occasions. His incarcerations and history of criminal involvement has hindered his chances of gaining employment and at this time he is not in a position to sufficiently care and provide for Zaquiel G. Due to Father's partial compliance with services he received at Capital Region Mental Health, DCF feels that he has not received the necessary tools needed to fully parent Zaquiel G. His diagnosis of Intermittent Explosive Disorder and the domestic violence between he and Keila C. suggests that he has difficulty controlling his temper and without addressing this issue, the Department does not recommend placing Zaquiel G. in his care. Although he attended visitations with Zaquiel G., he was not compliant with attending visitations on time, citing that he did not want to go across town for his visits, even though he did not wish to CT Page 11472 change to visitation service providers within his neighborhood. It is the Department's position that Father lacks the resources, ability and interest to be an appropriate caretaker for his son.
The clear and convincing evidence also shows that Keila C. and Jesus G. have failed to gain insight into becoming safe, nurturing and responsible parents for Zaquiel G. The clear and convincing evidence shows that their judgment and conduct still remain questionable, and has not improved since their child was taken into DCF care.
The parents' performance clearly and convincingly shows that they lack the attributes and characteristics necessary to fulfill valid parental roles. Their recalcitrance concerning referrals clearly and convincingly show that, without commitment to consistent substance abuse treatment, as well as individual and parenting counseling, and, without a commitment to complying with the laws of the State of Connecticut, it is likely that they have extinguished what little chance they ever had to be able to serve as safe, nurturing and responsible parents for any child.
An additional factor to consider in this case is time. The clear and convincing evidence demonstrates Zaquiel G.'s pressing need for permanence and stability. Unfortunately, much time would be required for the parents to show that they have forsaken substance abuse, addressed their issues, undertaken the necessary counseling and succeeded in it, established themselves in the community and shown that they are capable of being safe, nurturing and responsible parents to their child.
Zaquiel G. cannot delay his need for permanence and stability for his parents' uncertain future.
Based upon the parents' behavior and performance so far, this court cannot foresee them ever having the ability or the opportunity to follow the regimen necessary for this child to maximize his abilities and achievements.
The clear and convincing evidence shows that the time needed for the parents to rehabilitate themselves and to establish themselves in the community as safe, nurturing and responsible parents, if that were possible, is time that their son cannot afford.
Keila C's and Jesus G.'s parental performance clearly and convincingly shows that they lack the attributes and characteristics necessary to fulfill valid parental roles. Their conduct clearly and convincingly show that it is unlikely that they will ever be able to conform their CT Page 11473 behaviors to appropriate norms or be able to serve as safe, nurturing and responsible parents for Zaquiel G.
Our courts have recognized that "long-term stability is critical to a child's future health and development . . ." In re Eden F., 250 Conn. 674, 709, 741 A.2d 873 (1999). Furthermore, "[b]ecause of the psychological effects of prolonged termination proceedings on young children, time is of the essence" when resolving issues related to the permanent or temporary care of neglected children. In re Alexander V., 25 Conn.App. 741, 748, 596 A.2d 934 (1991), aff'd, 223 Conn. 557, 613 A.2d 780 (1992); see also In re Juvenile Appeal (84-CD), 189 Conn. 276, 292, 455 A.2d 1313 (1983). The court is obliged to agree with DCF and concludes that the clear and convincing evidence in this case establishes that Zaquiel G. is entitled to the benefit of ending, without further delay, the period of uncertainty as to the availability of his biological parents as caretakers.
Having balanced Zaquiel G.'s individual and intrinsic needs for stability and permanency against the benefits of maintaining a connection with Keila C. and Jesus G., the clear and convincing evidence in this case establishes that the child's best interests cannot be served by continuing to maintain any legal relationship to his parents. Pamela B. v. Ment, supra, 244 Conn. 313-14.
Accordingly, with respect to the best interests of the child as contemplated by C.G.S. § 17a-112(j)(2), by clear and convincing evidence, and based upon all of the foregoing, including the testimony and evidence presented, the court finds that termination of the parental rights of Keila C. and Jesus G. as to Zaquiel G. is in the best interests of the child in question.
IV CONCLUSION
The court having considered all statutory considerations and having found by clear and convincing evidence that grounds exist for termination of parental rights, further finds upon all the facts and circumstances presented, that it is in Zaquiel G.'s best interest to terminate the parental rights of Keila C., the biological Mother and Jesus G., the biological Father of the child. Accordingly, it is ordered that their parental rights to Zaquiel G. are hereby terminated.
It is further ordered that the Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families be appointed the statutory parent for this child CT Page 11474 for the purpose of securing an adoptive family and a permanent placement for this child.
The statutory parent is ordered to file the appropriate written reports with the court, as are required by state and federal law and which show the efforts to effect the permanent placement of this child.
CT Page 11475