IN RE: Iszak G.-B.1 (2012)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

On January 25, 2012, Joette Katz, the commissioner of the Department of Children and Families (“DCF”), filed a petition to terminate the parental rights of Martina G. and Roger B. to their child Iszak G–B., now five years old.   The parents have appeared and have been represented by counsel.   The child is represented by counsel.   Neither parent claims Indian Tribal affiliation.   The court is aware of no other proceedings pending in any other court regarding the custody of the children.   This court has jurisdiction.

On March 8, 2012, the paternal rights of Roger B. were terminated by the court (Simon, J.).   On June 6, 2012, the mother appeared with counsel for a contested hearing.   The court reviewed the many documents entered in to evidence.   After considering all of the evidence presented and having the opportunity to observe the mother, the court makes the following findings of fact by clear and convincing evidence.

PART I

GROUNDS ALLEGED

The commissioner alleges that the child has been found in a prior proceeding to have been neglected or uncared for and the mother has failed to achieve such degree of personal rehabilitation that would encourage the belief that within a reasonable time, considering the age and needs of the child, she could assume a responsible position the life of the children. § 17a–112(j)(3)(B)(I).

The record reflects that a finding of neglect or uncared for was made on May 12, 2011.

SOCIOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

Mother

Martina is thirty-seven years of age.   She has been in a relationship with the father of Iszak for fifteen years.   She reports that the relationship has now ended.   They never married and are now separated.   Martina had another child born in 1995.   The parental rights to that child were terminated in 2001 because “I felt like throwing him against the wall.”  (Exhibit D.) She receives social security disability payments.   She has had no gainful employment since 1993.

Martina admits to having mental health problems, her first psychiatric hospitalization being at age 16.   She told the psychological evaluator that she estimates having been hospitalized on 17 occasions.   DCF alleges she has been hospitalized 12 times in the five-month period of June 2011 and October 2011, for depression and suicidal ideation.   Martina understands her mental health diagnosis as major depressive disorder (with psychotic features) and post traumatic stress disorder.

Martina was asked about the removal of Iszak.  “She volunteered ‘My oldest (Isaiah) is fine where he is.   My youngest (Iszak), they don't think I can raise him for the next 14 years and, when you put it that way, I don't think so either, but I have to take it one day at a time ․

There have been reports of cocaine use, although she denies this.   There have been reports of alcohol excess, although she admits to drinking only one beer.   And there have been reports of her gambling away her limited income.   She admits she gambles “You only go there after you pay your bills, and then you win.”   There is clear evidence that she has been evicted for non-payment of rent and admits to large unpaid utility bills.

The psychologist concludes that she needs regular and consistent individual psychotherapy.   Additionally, group treatments that emphasize and build coping skills and self-regulation.   If she enters another romantic relationship, Dr. Rogers also recommends relations skills counseling.  “In light of her multiple decompensations it is anticipated that she will periodically require a higher level of care.   Consideration should be given to proactively including her in intensive outpatient programs to reduce the likelihood of psychiatric hospitalization.”

Child

Iszak was born on September 23, 2006.   He was formally placed by DCF with his current foster mother on March 12, 2011, although he has spent much of his young life with the foster mother when Martina was psychiatrically disabled or hospitalized.   His older brother Isaiah is now 16 and has been adopted by the foster mother.   Curiously, Martina views this foster mother as a mother figure to herself.

CAUSE OF REMOVAL

DCF received reports and investigated Martina and the child over many months prior to removal.  (See Summary of Facts Substantiating Allegations of Neglect, as of file appears 2/18/11 and Exhibit A.) It is only necessary to say that Martina was in a state of deteriorating mental health with no assistance from Iszak's father.   Her conduct placed the safety of Iszak at risk.   As has been previously mentioned, Martina's issues are long standing and chronic.

EFFORTS AND SERVICES

Martina has been offered individual therapy at Community Health Resources, at the Institute of Living and at Intercommunity Mental Health services.   They have provided parenting education at Kidsafe, substance abuse evaluations and therapy, case management services, visitation and transportation as needed.

Martina has not done well with services.   The parenting educator does not feel that Martina is capable of following through with sound child-rearing practices and providing consistent discipline due to her unresolved mental health issues.   On December 19, 2011, Martina was unsuccessfully discharged from Community Health Resources for failure to attend.   The therapist had recommended medication which Martina refused.   She has stopped taking her medications.   Martina admits to present depression and to suicidal ideation.   She was admitted to the Institute for Living on February 2, 2012, and discharged six days later.   A condition of her discharge was that she was to leave the Institute and go directly to Intercommunity Mental Health (IMH) services.   When the DCF arranged medical cab arrived, Martina instructed the driver to take her home.   She did not go to the mental health services as directed.

A week later she went to IMH on February 15, 2012.   She was depressed, not eating (she is anorexic) or drinking.   IMH recommended re-admission to IOL. She was readmitted on February 20, 2012.   She remained there into March.

Respondent's Exhibit 1 is a letter from Martina's present therapist.   She reports that in addition to the March admission to IOL, she had a subsequent inpatient stay on April 12, 2012.   Since then Martina has indicated several things to the therapist that suggest she is making progress.   The most notable comment is that Martina has attended almost 100% of her meetings with her therapist during the six weeks since her last hospital admission.

Martina has in the past considered consenting to the termination of her parental rights, but she is unable to do that.   The court is aware that she loves her child.   The issue is parental competence.  In re Christina M., 90 Conn.App. 565 (2005).

ADJUDICATION

The court accordingly finds that the mother has failed to achieve rehabilitation since the removal of the child in March 2011.   There is nothing in the conduct of the mother that suggests that her rehabilitation can be realized within a reasonable time given the age and needs of Iszak.   The court further finds that although Martina loves her son, she is unable or unwilling to benefit from reunification efforts.

PART II

DISPOSITIONMANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS General Statutes § 17a–112(k)a. The timeliness, nature and extent of services offered, provided and made available to the parent and the child by an agency to facilitate the reunion of the child with the parent— § 17a–112(k)(1).

Previously discussed.

b. Whether the Department of Children and Families has made reasonable efforts to reunite the family pursuant to the federal Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, as amended— § 17a–112(k)(2).

The court finds that reasonable efforts to reunite have been made but were not possible due to the issues of parental competence.

c. The terms of any applicable court order entered into and agreed upon by any individual or agency and the parent, and the extent to which all parties have fulfilled their obligations under such order— § 17a–112(k)(3).

Those orders were as follows:

(1) Keep all appointments set by or with DCF. Cooperate with DCF home visits, announced or unannounced, and visits by the child(ren)'s court-appointed attorney and/or guardian ad litem.

(2) Keep whereabouts known to DCF and your attorney.

(3) Visit child(ren) as often as DCF permits and demonstrate appropriate parent/child interaction during visits

(4) Participate in parenting and individual counseling and make progress toward the identified treatment goals.

(5) Accept and cooperate with in-home support services referred by DCF and make progress toward treatment goals.

(6) Do not use illegal drugs or abuse alcohol;  submit to random drug testing;  submit to substance abuse evaluation and follow treatment recommendations.

(7) Cooperate with recommended service providers recommended for parenting/individual/family counseling, in-home support services, and/or substance abuse treatment and sign releases allowing DCF to communicate with the providers.

(8) Cooperate with court-ordered evaluations.

(9) Secure and maintain adequate housing and legal income.

(10) Identify changes in household composition.

(11) No further involvement in the criminal justice system.

(12) Cooperate with child's therapy.

(13) Supply names and addresses of grandparents and of persons the parent would like DCF to consider as a placement resource.

d. The feelings and emotional ties of the child with respect to his parents, any guardian of his person and any person who has exercised physical care, custody or control of the child for at least one year and with whom the child has developed significant emotional ties— § 17a–112(k)(4).

Three months after his removal from Martina, at age 4, Iszak was evaluated by the psychologist.   The child had a poor fund of information and low academic skills for his age.   He was unclear of his age, he was unable to recite the alphabet nor could he name his colors.   He could not reliably count.

DCF reports that Iszak is now bonded to his foster mother and looks to her for love, nurturance and guidance.   The foster mother is willing to serve in an adoptive role for this child as she has for his older brother.

e. The age of the child— § 17a–112(k)

Iszak is five and a half.

f. The efforts the parent has made to adjust his circumstances, conduct, or conditions to make it in the best interest of the child to return him to his home in the foreseeable future, including, but not limited to, (A) the extent to which the parent has maintained contact with the child as part of an effort to reunite the child with the parent, provided the court may give weight to incidental visitations, communications or contributions and (B) the maintenance of regular contact or communication with the guardian or other custodian of the child— § 17a–112(k)

DCF reports a noticeable decline in visitation over the past six months.   This may be that she has, on some level, acknowledged that her parental rights were likely to be terminated.

i. The extent to which a parent has been prevented from maintaining a meaningful relationship with the child by the unreasonable act or conduct of the other parent of the child, or the unreasonable act of any other person or by the economic circumstances of the parent— § 17a–112(k)

There is nothing in the record to suggest any obstacles to Martina, except those she has self created.

BEST INTEREST FINDING:  § 17a–112(j)(2)

The final element of the termination of the parental rights statute, § 17a–112(j), requires that, before granting a petition for such termination, the court must find “by clear and convincing evidence ․ (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child ․” The best interest standard is inherently flexible and fact-specific to each child, giving the court broad discretion to consider all the different and individualized factors that might affect a specific child's welfare.   In determining whether terminating the parental rights of these parents. would be in the child's best interest the court has considered:  the child's interest “in sustained growth, development, well-being, and in the continuity and stability of his environment”;  Capetta v. Capetta, 196 Conn. 10, 16, 490 A.2d 996 (1985);  their age and needs;  the length and nature of his stay in foster care;  the contact maintained with his birth parents and the potential benefit or detriment to the child of retaining a connection with his biological parents;  the genetic bond to the birth parents;  In re Savanna M., 55 Conn.App. 807, 816, 740 A.2d 484 (1999);  and the seven statutory factors and the court's findings thereon.

Based upon these considerations, the court finds that termination of parental rights is in the child's best interests.

PART III

ORDERS

It is ordered that the parental rights of the biological mother, Martina, are terminated.   The Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families is appointed the statutory parent.   A case plan shall be submitted within thirty days and such other reports as are required by law shall be filed in a timely fashion.

The Clerk of the Probate Court with jurisdiction over any subsequent adoption of the child shall notify in writing the Deputy Chief Clerk of the Superior Court for Juvenile Matters at 25 School Street, Rockville, CT 06066 of the date when said adoption is finalized.

Judgment may enter accordingly.

Foley, Judge Trial Referee # 420

Foley, Francis J., S.J.