APPEAL
FROM THE FAULKNER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 23JV-17-220]
HONORABLE DAVID M. CLARK, JUDGE
Tabitha McNulty, Arkansas Public Defender Commission, for
appellant.
Ellen
K. Howard, Office of Chief Counsel, for appellee.
Chrestman Group, PLLC, by: Keith L. Chrestman, attorney ad
litem for minor child.
MIKE
MURPHY, JUDGE
Appellant
Wilburn "Will" Heath appeals from the Faulkner
County Circuit Court's termination of his parental rights
to his child, H.H. (DOB: 3/15/2016). Will argues that the
circuit court erred in its determination because termination
of his parental rights was not in H.H.'s best interest.
[1] We
affirm.
The
Arkansas Department of Human Services ("DHS")
exercised emergency custody of H.H. on September 5, 2017, due
to domestic violence between the parents with the juvenile
present, drug use by both parents, inadequate supervision,
and parental unfitness. Both parents, Brittney and Will
Heath, lived in the home, and H.H. was removed from the
custody of both. The petition and supporting affidavit
detailed that H.H. has a sibling, C.M. Brittney reported that
C.M. was in the care of his maternal grandmother. On
September 8, the circuit court entered an ex parte order for
emergency custody of H.H. The order found that Will had four
violations and sentences against him for domestic violence
and that on two separate occasions, a no-contact order had
been entered and dismissed to protect Brittney from his
abuse. On September 12, the circuit court held a
probable-cause hearing wherein it found that probable cause
existed for H.H. to remain in DHS's custody.
On
October 10, 2017, the circuit court held an
adjudication-and-disposition hearing wherein it found that
based on the stipulation of the parties, H.H. was
dependent-neglected due to drug-use and domestic-violence
issues that resulted in parental unfitness. Additionally, the
circuit court found that the allegations in the original
emergency petition and affidavit were true and correct and
ordered that the goal of the case be reunification with a
concurrent goal of adoption. At the time of this hearing,
Will was incarcerated, and the circuit court ordered that his
visitation through DHS be contingent on his release from
custody. The circuit court further ordered, among other
things, that Will submit to a psychological evaluation and
follow the recommendations; participate in counseling; submit
to random drug screens; submit to a drug-and-alcohol
assessment and follow the recommendations; attend AA/NA
meetings and provide written documentation of such to the
caseworker; obtain and maintain stable housing and
employment; pay child support for H.H.; and cooperate with
DHS. It also advised Will that he had a year to comply with
these orders so that H.H. could permanently return to his
custody.
On
January 9, 2018, the circuit court held a review hearing
wherein it ordered that the goals continue to be
reunification and adoption. At this hearing, the circuit
court found that Will had only partially complied with the
case plan and court orders in that he had been arrested in
September 2017 for violating a no-contact order and domestic
abuse of Brittney; he was not employed; he had completed
parenting classes; and he was scheduled to begin treatment at
the Quapaw House that month. The circuit court further
ordered Will to enroll in and complete a program for domestic
violence.
The
circuit court held a second review hearing on April 24, 2018,
wherein it continued the previous goals and found that Will
had attended minimal visits with H.H.; was hospitalized for
attempted suicide; and had failed to comply with the case
plan and court orders in that he was incarcerated in the
Faulkner County jail for a probation revocation, violating a
no-contact order, and obstructing governmental operations. At
a third review hearing held on July 3, the circuit court
found that Will had made no progress toward alleviating or
mitigating the causes of H.H.'s removal from the home.
Specifically, the circuit court found Will had been in the
Faulkner County Detention Center for the past three months on
a twelve-month sentence.
On
August 21, the circuit court held a permanency-planning
hearing wherein it changed the goal to adoption. In support
of its order, the circuit court found that Will had been
released from jail into a six-month drug-rehabilitation
program; he had been incarcerated from April to July 2018; he
had not visited H.H. since March 2018; and he had not
completed mental-health treatment. DHS filed a termination
petition, and on October 2, the circuit court conducted a
termination-of-parental-rights hearing.
At the
termination hearing, Will testified that he was currently
living at the Zoo Outfitters Operation (the Zoo), which is a
six-month residential drug-rehabilitation program. He
admitted that he was not in a position to take H.H. into his
care that day but that the Zoo was equipped for H.H. to
visit. He explained that between the distance and the
visitation policy, he had not seen H.H. because visiting
hours were held when DHS's offices were closed. Will said
he had been sober since January. He testified that he was not
employed but worked free of charge for the Zoo. Will thought
that Lisa Tew, H.H.'s maternal grandmother, was an
appropriate placement for the time being. He acknowledged
H.H. had been out of his custody for over a year, but he
requested more time to continue the progress he was making.
Will explained that while he has had trouble with the law, it
was nothing related to drugs. He admitted he has not helped
support H.H. since this case opened. Lastly, he discussed his
suicide attempt that occurred immediately after he had
completed a detox program and his diagnosis of major
depressive disorder.
Lisa
Tew testified that she is the maternal grandmother and
currently the foster parent. She expressed her desire to
adopt H.H. if the court terminated the parental rights.
Cheryl
Taylor, the caseworker assigned to the case, explained that
Will had made a lot of progress but was not at a point that
he would be able to keep H.H. safe. Taylor said DHS had a
difficult time accommodating the Zoo's visitation
schedule because the Zoo would not provide times during
normal business hours to visit. She recommended that the
...