In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T.

DecidedAugust 18, 2022

Docket178 WAL 2022 (Granted)

StatusPublished

This text of In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T. (In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T., (Pa. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: K.T., A MINOR : No. 177 WAL 2022 : : PETITION OF: K.T. : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE INTEREST OF: K.T., A MINOR : No. 178 WAL 2022 : : PETITION OF: ALLEGHENY COUNTY : Petition for Allowance of Appeal CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES : from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

1. Whether this Court should grant review to ensure that trial courts across the Commonwealth are uniformly applying the correct standard for evaluating the bond between a child and parent when conducting a needs and welfare analysis under Section 2511(b) of the Adoption Act in an involuntary termination of parental rights case by:

a. Clarifying that the trial court must evaluate whether the bond is necessary and beneficial to the child and not just whether any parent- child bond exists; and

b. Clarifying that the trial court must evaluate whether severing that bond would cause the child to experience extreme emotional consequences and not just any adverse effect?

2. Whether a divided three judge panel of the Superior Court, by ignoring this Court’s decisions in In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) and In re E.M., 680 A.2d 481 (Pa. 1993), erred in affirming the trial court’s denial of a petition for termination of parental rights when the almost 5-year-old child had been in care in a secure and stable kinship pre-adoptive foster home for almost four years, and it was undisputed that the mother was unlikely to ever be able to parent the child, that the mother was still court- ordered to have supervised visits due to concerns about the mother’s behavior, and that the court-appointed psychologist opined that the child needed permanence through adoption by her kinship foster parent with whom the child enjoyed a strong and secure bond? Additionally, the Application for Leave to File a Brief in Support of Joint Petition for

Allowance of appeal as Amici Curiae is GRANTED.

[177 WAL 2022 and 178 WAL 2022] - 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: K.T., A MINOR : No. 177 WAL 2022 : : PETITION OF: K.T. : Petition for Allowance of Appeal : from the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE INTEREST OF: K.T., A MINOR : No. 178 WAL 2022 : : PETITION OF: ALLEGHENY COUNTY : Petition for Allowance of Appeal CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES : from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of August, 2022, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

1. Whether this Court should grant review to ensure that trial courts across the Commonwealth are uniformly applying the correct standard for evaluating the bond between a child and parent when conducting a needs and welfare analysis under Section 2511(b) of the Adoption Act in an involuntary termination of parental rights case by:

a. Clarifying that the trial court must evaluate whether the bond is necessary and beneficial to the child and not just whether any parent- child bond exists; and

b. Clarifying that the trial court must evaluate whether severing that bond would cause the child to experience extreme emotional consequences and not just any adverse effect?

2. Whether a divided three judge panel of the Superior Court, by ignoring this Court’s decisions in In re T.S.M., 71 A.3d 251 (Pa. 2013) and In re E.M., 680 A.2d 481 (Pa. 1993), erred in affirming the trial court’s denial of a petition for termination of parental rights when the almost 5-year-old child had been in care in a secure and stable kinship pre-adoptive foster home for almost four years, and it was undisputed that the mother was unlikely to ever be able to parent the child, that the mother was still court- ordered to have supervised visits due to concerns about the mother’s behavior, and that the court-appointed psychologist opined that the child needed permanence through adoption by her kinship foster parent with whom the child enjoyed a strong and secure bond? Additionally, the Application for Leave to File a Brief in Support of Joint Petition for

Allowance of appeal as Amici Curiae is GRANTED.

[177 WAL 2022 and 178 WAL 2022] - 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

In the Int. of: K.T., Pet of: K.T., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-int-of-kt-pet-of-kt-pa-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack