IN RE: Lillianna M. (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

On February 10, 2011, The Department of Children and Families (hereinafter DCF), imposed a ninety-six-hour hold on Lillianna M. (hereinafter Child) and requested that the Court (Baldwin, J.) enter an Order of Temporary Custody placing Child in DCF Custody.   A Marshal served Mother notice of the pending hearing on February 14, 2011, and Putative Father (hereinafter PF) on February 15, 2011.   Both were served with notice of a contemporaneous Neglect petition.   The preliminary hearing was scheduled for February 18, 2011, and Mother and PF (hereinafter Parents) appeared for presentment on that date.   The Court advised Parents of their rights and appointed counsel for them and Child.   The parties entered pro forma denials.   The Court scheduled the requested hearing on the Order of Temporary Custody and the Neglect Petition for March 28, 2011.

At the scheduled hearing, Mother elected not to contest the allegations and stood silent during trial.   PF contested DCF's allegations and sought immediate reunification with Child.

EXHIBITS

The Parties agreed that all ten exhibits offered by DCF should be admitted as full exhibits.   The court will consider only facts and circumstances concerning PF and his relationship to Child because Mother is standing silent and not seeking custody of Child at this time.

Exhibit A is a social worker's Affidavit prepared and sworn to by DCF Social Worker Dawn O. She recounted the pertinent events in affidavit as follows:

1. On New Years Eve, Mother's friends brought her to the Waterbury Hospital emergency room in an inebriated condition reporting that she had “feelings of hopelessness and depression;  did not feel safe;  and wanted to die.”

2. Mother has a substance abuse history that includes heroin, marijuana and alcohol abuse.   Her blood alcohol level on arrival was .23.

3. Following discharge from the hospital, Mother failed to address her mental health issues.   She has a history of suicide attempts including cutting and ingestion of pills.   She has also been inconsistent with prescribed medication.

4. Mother has three pending Termination of Parental Rights petitions in the Torrington Juvenile Court together with an approval and adoption of a permanency plan to terminate her parental rights.   The Petitions allege failure to rehabilitate, mental illness that interferes with her ability to care for Children, a history of substance abuse, and inability to access resources necessary to rehabilitate.

5. PF has a history of substance abuse and has resisted drug screens and substance abuse evaluations.

6. PF has a history of domestic violence dating back to 2007.

7. PF has a criminal history beginning in 1989.   At twenty-one he was convicted for statutory rape of a seventeen-year-old emancipated woman who had an infant child prior to the event.   His other convictions include Criminal Mischief, Breach of the Peace, interfering/resisting, violation of probation, burglary 3rd degree, disorderly conduct, and violation of probation and violation of protective orders.   The protective order remains in effect and PF continues to be in violation as he continues to provide support to Mother when she is in need.

Exhibits B, C, and D are Waterbury Police Department case incident reports.   The most recent occurred on February 10, 2011, between four and seven p.m. at PF's home as result of the DCF worker's report that Mother and PF were in PF's home in violation of a Protective Order requiring PF to avoid any contact with Mother.   PF was arrested for violation of the protective order.

Exhibit C concerns a police report from an unidentified third party dated September 19, 2010, about an incident at PF's home address.   Mother was present at the home and reported that PF struck her in the back of the head and pushed her down the porch stairs.   Mother reported no injuries and declined treatment.   PF refused to comment and was arrested for assault in the third degree and disorderly conduct.

Exhibit D recounts an incident that occurred on November 24, 2009, at 131 Crestwood Avenue.   The complainant alleged that PF hit him and kicked in a door on his truck.   The police were unable to find Father.   The exhibit does not reveal whether any further action was taken.

Exhibits E, F, and G establish that three different protective orders have been issued to restrict PF's contact with Mother.   The most recent and pertinent order (Exhibit E) was effective on September 20, 2010, and required that PF “not assault, threaten, abuse, harass, follow, interfere with, or stalk the protected person;  stay away from the home of the protected person and wherever the protected person shall reside;  not contact the protected person in any manner, including by written, electronic or telephone contact, and do not contact the protected person's home, workplace or others with whom the contact would be likely to cause annoyance or alarm to the protected person.”   The order did not set a termination date.   Exhibits H and G are not relevant to the issues in this case.

Exhibit H is evidence that PF did not acknowledge his paternity at the time of Child's birth.   However, it does note that he is named as Father by Mother.

Exhibit I is certification of PF's criminal history revealing nine convictions between August of 1989 and July of 2008 and notes that he has pending charges of disorderly conduct, assault in the third degree and violation of a protective order.   The last charge is a result of the presence of Mother in PF's family home on February 10, 2011.   As the Court reads the protective order, PF is allowed to be in his own home whether Mother is there or not.   He cannot be in Mother's home.

Exhibit J establishes that PF failed to verify an address, but maintained an appropriate residence with his extended family in compliance with his sexual offender requirements.

TESTIMONY

The Attorney General opened his presentation with the representation that he would rely on Exhibit A—the Social Worker affidavit—and would not call the investigative social worker who was the first DCF staff member to examine facts and circumstances that might justify OTC and the neglect petition supporting it.   With the agreement of all parties, the Court allowed counsel for PF to open the hearing with testimony from the investigative Social Worker who responded to the fact that Mother had been admitted to St. Mary's Hospital early on New Year's day after a night of drinking.   From that day on, Mother acknowledged that she needed to undergo serious treatment of her use of illegal substances.   As of the date of trial Mother continued to believe that she was not in any condition to care for Child, and stood silent as to whether commitment is in Child's best interest.

DCF and Counsel for PF agreed that motions to Quash Supoenae served on St. Mary's Hospital and an individual worker at the Hospital would be GRANTED by the Court.   The Attorney General disclosed that he would not call DCF Investigative Social Worker Michael C. to testify and offered counsel for PF the opportunity to examine the listed Social Worker, who also appeared on Defense Counsel's list of witnesses out of order.   Michael C.'s testimony was favorable to PF. He reported that Child's home was appropriate and well kept and contained the full spectrum of PF's extended family.   The only condition of concern in the home was Grandfather's extensive gun collection that he kept under very secure lock and key.   Based on witness's evaluations and reports, DCF allowed Child to remain in the care of his grandparents through all of January and half of February without any expressed concern about PF's presence there.

DCF's investigation of the home having been completed, a DCF Social Worker (Dawn O.) was assigned to the case.   The Court granted the Attorney General's request to qualify as an expert in the area of social work.   She testified that as part of her investigation, she discovered Mother hiding in the cellar of PF's family home.   Her testimony is summarized above in Exhibit A, 1 above.

The Court then heard the testimony of the PF, paternal grandfather, and PF's seventeen-year-old son.   Child has been living with this family since shortly after her birth.   All reports from DCF during the period of care have been positive and Child has thrived in the care of the family.   All of the testimony heard by the Court reported that Child is safe in the care provided by the broadly extended family.

FINDINGS

1. Child was born on July 22, 2010.

2. Mother recognizes that she is unable to care for Child at this time and is comfortable that her daughter is cared for by PF's extended family.

3. PF has a long history of domestic violence and uncontrolled anger.

4. Over the last eight Months, PF has failed to act to establish that he is Child's Father.

5. Mother has an extended DCF history dating back to 2004 for allegations of physical abuse, physical neglect and cruelty to persons regarding her children and none of them are in her custody at this time.

6. DCF has pending petitions to terminate her parental rights to three of her older Children.

7. Mother has mental health issues which she has failed to address.

8. Mother has an extensive record of substance abuse.

9. Mother acknowledges that she is not prepared to care for Child.

10. Mother prefers that Child be placed with PF's family.

11. Child was removed from her original placement with PF's Family on February 10, 2011, and remains in foster care.

12. Over the last eight months PF has not taken any steps to prove that he is Child's Father.

ORDER

1. The Order of Temporary Custody should be and is hereby SUSTAINED.

Respectfully Submitted,

Hon. Thayer Baldwin, Jr.

Judge Trial Referee

Baldwin, Thayer, J.