Summary: Termination of parental rights was proper when the evidence shows the parents had failed to create a place to which the children could return and the children had become so bonded with the foster parents it would be damaging to separate them. Additionally, the Department is only required to expend reasonable efforts toward reunification when the children were removed after services had begun.
Seward County Court acquired jurisdiction of twins L.C. and J.C. (born June 15, 1974) and E.C. (born November 6, 1975) as the result of an adjudication that they were children within § 43-202(2)(b), (c), (d), and (e)(Reissue 1978) because of the unclean condition of the family residence, the lack of food available for the children to eat, and the unsuitable and unclean mattress on which the children slept. Also, because the children were dirty, wore unclean clothes, were underfed, and appeared malnourished and to have arrested social and mental development. The children were placed in a foster home after a dispositional hearing on January 3, 1979. The county ordered that continuing efforts be made to provide the natural parents with the necessary skills and training to reunify the family. After a review hearing on March 31, 1980, the county determined that after 2 years of intensive assistance and all reasonable efforts being made the parents were still unable to adequately care for the children. Permanent custody of the children was placed with the state for permanent foster placement and ordered no further visitation with natural parents. On January 16, 1981 the district court in Seward County concluded that March 31 order had the effect of terminating the parents’ rights without any pleading having been filed.
On May 3, 1982, pursuant to the parents’ request, the county court transferred the case to Lancaster County separate juvenile court, where the existing custody arrangement continues but did not order visitation or institute a plan. On October 10, 1983, the parents were granted visitation with the children at least once per month. On April 20, 1984 the juvenile court ordered continued visitation between the children and their parents to facilitate teaching parenting skills, to extend overnight visits, a psychological evaluation of the parents, counseling for the parents, foster parents, and children, and that all parties consider long-term care that provides permanence for the children. On October 22, 1984, the juvenile court increased visitation to once every 2 weeks.
In May 24, 1985, the court determined that the visitations were emotionally disturbing for the children and they did want visitation based on the opinion of a clinical psychologist. In November 25, 1986, the court ordered maximum visitation consistent with the welfare and best interests of the children, which continued until January 17, 1989. For the first time, the court ordered that parents cooperate with social workers to correct the conditions of neglect that led to the removal. The petition to terminate parental rights was filed March 9, 1989 and granted July 7, 1989 because they had substantially and continuously or repeatedly neglected the children and refused to give them parental care and protection. Further, the court found the record did not support finding the parents had been provided sufficient direction of the conditions they were required to correct.
Social workers testified that until 1988 the permanency goal was adoption by the foster family, not reunification with the natural family. In 1988, a worker testified that the goal became reunification. Although the parents had been very cooperative and positive during the early stages, by 1988 the parents had become disenchanted with the system and were no longer cooperative. On social worker even admitted that he did not make overt steps to provide services for the parents but left the parents to pursue them on their own. Testimony does suggest that the parents were unable to improve their skills, even with training classes. Additionally, the children lived with their foster parents for 10 years and were bonded with them. They did not want to be returned for their natural parents and a psychologist testified it was be disruptive to their lives to return them.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed. The parents first argue that parental rights may not be terminated until the department has expended reasonable efforts to reunify the family and that the department breached its responsibility. However, the Court found that § 43-246 has never been interpreted to require the department to institute a rehabilitation plan of a parent whose child has been found to be dependent and neglected. The state is only required to provide a rehabilitation plan when the termination is pursuant to § 43-292(6), when the state must prove the parents had been given adequate opportunity to rehabilitate. Further, § 42-284 requires reasonable rehabilitation efforts to prevent the removal of the child.
The parents next argued that there was insufficient evidence that the parents had substantially, continuously or repeatedly neglected their children and had refused to give them adequate care. The evidence does establish that the parents failed to provide an environment to which the children could return. Finally, the parents argued the court erred in finding termination in the best interest of the children. The Court finds sufficient evidence to support this conclusion, especially considering the bond between the children and their foster family. The Court expressed concern about how this case was managed and how long it took to get to case closure.