 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re T.B.9/14/2000
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED
Erickson* and Pierce*, JJ., concur *Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under provisions of the Colo. Const., art. VI, Sec. 5(3), and §24-51-1105, C.R.S. 2000.
Mother, T.B., appeals a trial court judgment terminating her parental rights with respect to children T.B. and M.B. We affirm.
Mother was a victim of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse as a child and has a long history of drug abuse, significant mental illness, and repeated involvement in abusive relationships. On several occasions she has been arrested for and convicted of various offenses.
In early 1997, mother was terminated from a substance abuse treatment program after an incident of alleged child abuse. As a result of that incident, the Montezuma County Department of Social Services initiated an action in dependency and neglect. An order deferring adjudication was entered, and the children were placed in foster care. A treatment program was developed and modified numerous times to address mother's needs, with the goal of reuniting her with the children.
During the course of the treatment plans, mother violated the terms of her probation by leaving a residential drug treatment program without permission and failing a drug test. Upon revocation of her probation, she was sentenced to jail and then community corrections.
When the treatment plans proved unsuccessful, the trial court revoked the deferred adjudication and found the children to be dependent and neglected. Subsequently, following a hearing, the court terminated mother's parental rights.
The court found that the treatment plan had been appropriate to the mother's and the children's particular circumstances but had not been successful; that the children had resided almost exclusively in foster care since May 1997; that although mother loved the children, her personality disorders caused inappropriate behavior on her part and there was a high likelihood that such behavior would continue; that mother was unfit and that her unfitness was unlikely to change within a reasonable time; and that her unfitness was manifested by excessive physical punishment of the children, excessive use of controlled substances, reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of the children, repeated criminal convictions, and other poor decisions that were not in the best interests of the children.
I.
Mother contends that the trial court erred as a matter of law by not properly considering the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §12101, et seq. (2000), in deciding to terminate her parental rights. We disagree.
Mother argues that she is disabled because of her prior drug usage and that the ADA therefore precludes, or at least limits, the trial court's authority to terminate her parental rights. The applicability of the ADA to the termination of parental rights is a matter of first impression in Colorado.
Parents have a constitutional interest, under the Fourteenth Amendment, in raising their children. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 64 S.Ct. 438, 88 L.Ed. 645 (1944). However, the rights of parents may be limited when it appears their decisions or actions will jeopardize the health or safety of their children. Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 92 S.Ct. 1526, 32 L.Ed.2d 15 (1971).
When the welfare of a child is significantly threatened, the state may terminate parental rights. Section 19-3-604, C.R.S. 2000. Because of the important liberty interest parents have in raising their children, a termination proceeding must provide fundamentally fair procedures. Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 102 S.Ct. 1388, 71 L.
Page 1 2 Colorado Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|