Date: 11-15-2024

Case Style:

In the Interest of A.B.

Case Number: 127,317

Judge: Michael Hoelscher

Court: District Court, Sedgwick County, Kansas

Plaintiff's Attorney: Sedgwick County, Kansas District Attorney's Office

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Wichita Family Law Lawyer Directory

Description:

Wichita, Kansas family law lawyer represented the father in a termination of parental rights action.

A.B. was born in July 2022 and placed in the NICU. A few days later, the State filed a child in need of care petition. The petition alleged that Mother's parental rights to her other seven children and Father's parental rights to his two other children had been recently terminated; there was a history of domestic violence between Father and Mother; Father had pending charges for aggravated battery, aggravated assault, and violation of a protective order; and both parents had a history of substance abuse. The district court placed A.B. in the protective custody of the Secretary of the Department for Children and Families. Saint Francis Ministries was assigned to monitor the case.

At the time of A.B.'s birth, Father was "on the run" because there were active warrants for his arrest. He had cut off his house arrest bracelet. Father was arrested and incarcerated in August 2022.

In November 2022, Father pled guilty to aggravated battery under case No. 20CR1468; aggravated assault and criminal threat under case No. 21CR775; and aggravated domestic battery under case No. 22CR1310. Mother was the victim in case Nos. 20CR1468 and 22CR1310. The complaints alleged that Father knowingly impeded the normal breathing or blood circulation of Mother by applying pressure to Mother's throat, neck, or chest and that Father repeatedly punched Mother in the face. Father was granted a downward dispositional departure to 24 months' probation with a total underlying prison sentence of 62 months.

Two days later, Father entered a no contest statement to the child in need of care petition. The district court found A.B. was a child in need of care.

Father's permanency plan tasks were to complete a clinical interview and assessment; abstain from illegal drugs, alcohol, and prescription drugs without a valid prescription; obtain and maintain employment; obtain and maintain appropriate housing; attend budgeting and nutrition classes; complete random urinalysis (UA) and hair follicle tests; and complete a substance abuse evaluation.

In February 2023, Father was released from jail. Thereafter, Father contacted Saint Francis Ministries about this case. A few days later, the district court held a permanency hearing at which Father did not appear. The district court found reintegration was no longer a viable goal.

In March 2023, the State moved for findings of unfitness and termination of parental rights of both parents. The State alleged Father was unfit on these grounds:

• Failure of reasonable efforts made by appropriate public or private agencies to rehabilitate the family. K.S.A. 38-2269(b)(7).

• Lack of effort on the part of the parent to adjust the parent's circumstances, conduct or conditions to meet the needs of the child. K.S.A. 38-2269(b)(8).

• Failure to maintain regular visitation, contact or communication with the child or with the custodian of the child. K.S.A. 38-2269(c)(2).

• Failure to carry out a reasonable plan approved by the court directed toward the integration of the child into the parental home. K.S.A. 38-2269(c)(3).

In July 2023, the district court terminated Mother's parental rights but continued Father's hearing. In August 2023, Father was given an achievement plan to let him know what he needed to do to reintegrate with A.B. The achievement plan required him to comply with his UAs and hair follicle tests, attend all visitations, obtain and provide proof of employment, obtain appropriate housing and complete a walk-through, maintain appropriate communication with his case team, ask for a nonnarcotic medication, remain compliant with his probation, and complete his batterer's intervention class.

* * *


The statute lists nine nonexclusive factors the district court shall consider in determining unfitness. K.S.A. 38-2269(b). The district court must also consider a separate list of four nonexclusive factors when a child is not in the parent's physical custody. K.S.A. 38-2269(c). Any one of the factors in K.S.A. 38-2269(b) or (c) may, but does not necessarily, establish grounds for termination of parental rights. K.S.A. 38-2269(f).

In re A.B., 127,317 (Kan. App. Nov 15, 2024)

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: