SUMMARY: Termination was improper where the mother had substantially complied with virtually every requirement specified by the court, had improved significantly as a parent and, while there were still some concerns about the cleanliness of the home, there were no concerns about the children’s safety with the mother.
MacKenzie, DOB 12/03, and Kennedy, DOB 7/06, were removed from the home on April 24, 2007, after police responding to allegations that MacKenzie was dirty, unkempt and having a strong odor discovered them living in a filthy home with drug paraphernalia and pornography within reach of the children. On August 6, 2007, the parents admitted that use of alcohol and/or controlled substances placed the children at risk for harm. Disposition was continued several times until January 23, 2008, when the court ordered Laura undergo random UAs, maintain adequate housing, have supervised visits, participate in family support services, participate in outpatient treatment as arranged by DHHS, attend AA/NA meetings and participate in individual therapy. Review hearings were held through March 2009. On May 22, 2009, the State filed a motion to terminate Laura’s parental rights to Kennedy and MacKenzie pursuant to 43-292(2), (6) and (7). After hearings on September 16, 2009, November 30, 2009, and January 13, 2010, the court terminated Laura’s parental rights. Evidence adduced at trial showed that Laura continued to have problems with cleanliness of the house but that the house had remained clean for 10 months at the time of the last hearing and that she had given away the majority of her pets that were causing the issues. Although DHHS alleged that Laura had not completed drug treatment, Laura established that she had paid for and completed treatment with a licensed substance abuse counselor. This counselor testified that Laura does not seem to be using anymore and has a good prognosis for the future. Visitation and family support workers also spoke positively of Laura’s improved ability to parent, especially as to MacKenzie who has behavioral issues. A family therapist testified as to her surprise over the filing of the termination petition given Laura’s improvement at visitation and in her ability to parent MacKenzie. There was also testimony establishing that Laura had separated from the father, who was a negative influence on her, and only had sporadic contact related to the children.
The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed the termination of parental rights, holding that Laura “has substantially complied with everything that she was asked and ordered to do.” The Court of Appeals noted that perfection of a parent is not required but rather a “parent’s continued improvement in parenting skills and a beneficial relationship between parent and child.” Kennedy B. at 7 (quoting In re Crystal C., 12 Neb. App. 458, 465, 676 N.W.2d 378, 384 (2004)). It reviewed the improvements Laura had made and her compliance with the case plan and noted that the State focused too much on her relationship with the father, which was eventually established to be reasonable under the circumstances. The Court of Appeals found that Laura “cleaned up her home and no longer uses drugs,…was attentive during visits, applied the skills she learned…and was successful in helping MacKenzie’s behavior problems, and continued to gain and enhance her parenting skills.