SUMMARY: “When proceeding solely under § 43-292(7),” which requires that the child has been in out-of-home placement for 15 of the most recent 22 months, “the appellate court must be particularly diligent in its de novo review of whether termination is in the best interests of the child.”
The mother appeals from an order terminating her parental rights. The Court of Appeals upheld the termination order. There was no factual dispute that the child had “been in out-of-home placement continuously since December 2003, which was almost 17 months at the time the motion to terminate was filed and which was 24 months at the time that the juvenile court’s termination order was entered.”
On best interests, evidence was introduced that Malik’s foster parent had” bonded with Malik, would like to continue to care for and support him, and would like to adopt him.”Evidence also indicated that Malik’s mom did not demonstrate “as desire to be a part of Malik’s life, much less a desire to be a part of Malik’s life, much less a desire to parent him.” Malik’s mother made little effort to visit Malik and “sent him no cards or letters,” and gave “him a gift on only one occasion.” Thus, termination was in Malik’s best interests.