IN RE: Michael Jose R. (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

On September 3, 2013, Joette Katz, as she is the commissioner of the Department of Children and Families, (“DCF”), filed a petition pursuant to C.G.S. § 17a–112 et seq. to terminate the parental rights of Patricia R. and Vincente Doe to the minor child Michael Jose R. The mother has appeared and is represented by counsel.   The mother does not claim Indian Tribal affiliation.   The court is aware of no other proceedings pending in any other court regarding the custody of this child.   This court has jurisdiction.

At the commencement of this contested action, the mother has presented to the court properly executed forms consenting to the termination of her parental rights to Michael.   Having canvassed the mother, this court finds that she has been represented by competent counsel who was present with her when she executed the consent form.   The court further finds that the consent has been knowingly and voluntarily entered with a full understanding of the legal consequences of her action.   The consent has been accepted by the court.

The Department of Child and Families (DCF) through counsel has moved to amend the petition to withdraw the non-consensual grounds and to change the grounds to consent § 17a–112(I) of the mother.   Without objection, the motion was granted.

The issue of paternity is problematic.   Patricia tells DCF that she met Vincente at her place of employment.   She reports that this man is the father of Michael.   Vincente, according to Patricia had “borrowed papers,” that is, that he was illegally in this country.   She does not know Vincente's last name.   She reports that Vincente was unaware of her pregnancy and delivery.   Patricia has no knowledge of Vincente's whereabouts.   In the year since the child's birth she has not heard from Vincente.

At the commencement of this action, publication was made to Vincente Doe, or other person who may be the father of this child.   The court has confirmed publication.   Vincente Doe was defaulted by the court for failure to appear on October 3, 2013.  (Dyer, J.).

No paternal figure has ever appeared.   No biological paternal figure has established a relationship with the child, supported the child nor expressed interest in this child.   The father remains an unknown person.

With respect to Vincente Doe, the missing, unknown father of Michael, the court finds that he has failed to perfect his parental rights by coming forth in a timely fashion to support and raise his son.   Further, the court finds, there is no ongoing parent-child relationship with respect to Michael that ordinarily develops as a result of a parent having met on a continuing, day to day basis the physical, emotional, moral or educational needs of the child and to allow further time for the establishment or re-establishment of the parent-child relationship would be detrimental to the best interests of the child.

The petitioner has established these grounds by clear and convincing evidence.   While the court recognizes an obligation to consider the findings as set forth in C.G.S. § 17a–112(j), since the person of the biological father is unknown, no services could be provided to him, no reasonable efforts could be made to him, no relationship with the child could be repaired or improved, it would serve no useful purpose to examine the mandatory considerations.   Lex non requirit frutra.

Michael was born at Windham Hospital on July 23, 2012.   Michael is placed in a non-relative foster home.   DCF reports that he is a happy, healthy, well adjusted infant.   He has no known social or emotional concerns.   He is receiving all necessary medical care.   The extended members of the maternal family support adoption as a goal for Michael.   The child's attorney supports the plan of termination of parental rights and adoption.

DISPOSITION

With respect to the best interests of the child by clear and convincing evidence, and based upon all of the evidence, the court finds that termination of the parental rights of the parents is in the best interest of the child.   In making this finding that termination of the respondents' parental rights would be in the child's best interest, the court has examined multiple relevant factors including the notion that permanency, consistency and stability are crucial for children.   Children's interests in sustained growth, development, well-being, stability and continuity of environment are equally paramount.   The length of stay in foster care;  the nature of the relationship of the child with the biological parents;  the degree of contact maintained with the biological parents;  and the genetic bond to respondents, all have been considered.

IV. ORDER

It is accordingly, ORDERED that the parental rights of Patricia R. upon her consent, and Vincente Doe, the unknown father of the child, are hereby terminated as to Michael.   The Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families is hereby appointed the statutory parent.

A case report shall be submitted within thirty days of this judgment, and such further reports shall be timely presented to the court as required by law.

The clerk of any 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 81 Columbia Ave., Willimantic CT of the date when said adoption is finalized.

Judgment may enter accordingly.

Foley, J.T.R.

Foley, Francis J., J.T.R.