In the Int. of: P.T.G., Appeal of: M.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

In the Int. of: P.T.G., Appeal of: M.G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 9, 2022·No. 1636 MDA 2021·Unpublished

Opinion

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

IN THE INTEREST OF: P.T.G., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

APPEAL OF: M.G., MOTHER No. 1636 MDA 2021

Appeal from the Dispositional Order Entered November 18, 2021 In the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County Juvenile Division at No.: CP-49-DP-0000083-2011

BEFORE: STABILE, J., KING, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.* MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.: FILED JUNE 09, 2022 Appellant, M.G. (“Mother”) appeals from the November 18, 2021 dispositional order adjudicating P.T.G. (“Child”), her minor child, dependent, removing him from the home of Mother and C.S., his Maternal Grandmother (“Maternal Grandmother”), placing Child in foster care, and ordering supervised visitation with a goal of reunification. We affirm in part and vacate in part.

Northumberland County Children and Youth Services (“CYS” or the “Agency”) has been involved with Child’s family since 2011, when he was four years old. Child was first adjudicated dependent on November 30, 2011 and placed in legal custody of CYS. He remained in placement until February of

* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.

2013, after which Child and Mother lived with Maternal Grandmother and Child’s maternal grandfather, who has since passed away. On December 27, 2016, CYS received another referral when Mother overdosed on heroin in the family home. CYS first received concerns about truancy from Child’s school in November of 2019, and again on March 5, 2020. On February 18, 2021, CYS met with Maternal Grandmother regarding Child’s failure to complete schoolwork and his failure to login to remote learning sessions. Another meeting occurred on February 23, 2021 regarding, among other things, Child’s pending failure of several of his seventh-grade courses. CYS filed a dependency petition on March 18, 2021 alleging that Child was without proper parental care or control, and that he was habitually truant from school. The trial court conducted a hearing on May 6, 2021 and declined to adjudicate him dependent or remove him from the home.

The instant matter arose from an October 13, 2021 referral informing CYS that Child had completely failed to attend school during the 2021-2022 school year. N.T., 11/10/21, at 16. Several subsequent attempts to contact the family were unsuccessful. Id. at 16-18. On November 9, 2021, CYS personnel and a local police officer traveled to Maternal Grandmother’s home, where Mother and Child both lived. Initially no one answered the door, but Mother eventually arrived as a passenger in a car. Id. at 18. She was slumped over in the back of the car, and after exiting the vehicle she exhibited slurred speech and difficulty in standing. Id. at 18; N.T. 11/18/21, at 13.

Mother claimed she had just come from a methadone clinic. N.T 11/18/21, at 23. While Mother was present, the CYS caseworker was able to contact Maternal Grandmother—Child’s legal guardian—by phone. N.T. 11/10/21, at 18. Maternal Grandmother claimed to be shopping in Selinsgrove, but the police officer heard voices from inside the home. Id. at 18-19; N.T. 11/18/21, at 16-18. Eventually, Maternal Grandmother came to the door with Child. Id. She was unable to provide any verification that Child was enrolled in any cyber school or private school. N.T. 11/10/21, at 18-19; N.T. 11/18/21, at 19-20. Also, Grandmother spoke of difficulties in her life stemming from her deteriorating mental and physical health and the recent death of her husband, Child’s grandfather. N.T. 11/10/21, at 19; N.T. 11/18/21, at 16.

On November 9, 2021, CYS received a verbal order granting them physical custody of Child. N.T. 11/10/21, at 19-20. A shelter care hearing took place on November 10, 2021, and the trial court granted CYS’s petition for protective custody. Id. at 30-31. CYS filed a dependency petition on November 12, 2021, alleging that Child was without proper parental care or control.

At the November 18, 2021 hearing on the petition, school officials confirmed Child’s total absence from school during the Fall of 2021. N.T., 11/18/21, at 28. Child’s school received nothing regarding Child’s enrollment in any other school until a November 12, 2021 request from Milton Area School District. Id. at 46. Child failed two subjects as a seventh grader the previous

year and never completed a required summer remedial program. Id. at 29- 32, 44-45. Thus, he would have had to repeat seventh grade when he returned. Id. at 50. The principal confirmed that truancy letters had been sent on October 26, 2021 and November 9, 2021. Id. at 48. A school attendance improvement meeting between Mother, Maternal Grandmother, and school officials occurred on November 15, 2021, just before the hearing. Id. at 43, 50. Otherwise, the truancy proceeding had gone no further. Rather, the school referred the matter to CYS and the local police, resulting in the welfare check on November 9, 2021.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court entered the order on appeal. Mother filed this timely appeal in which she presents four questions for our review:

1. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by adjudicating [Child] dependent?

2. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by allowing the dependency petition to be amended?

3. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by removing [Child] from the physical custody of [Mother]?

4. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by ordering supervised visitation[.]?

Mother’s Brief at 2.

We conduct our review as follows:

[T]he standard of review in dependency cases requires an appellate court to accept the findings of fact and credibility determinations of the trial court if they are supported by the record, but does not require the appellate court to accept the

lower court’s inferences or conclusions of law. Accordingly, we review for an abuse of discretion.

In re E.B., 83 A.3d 426, 430 (Pa. Super. 2013).

The Juvenile Act defines dependent child, in relevant part, as follows:

“Dependent child.” A child who:

(1) is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for his physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals. A determination that there is a lack of proper parental care or control may be based upon evidence of conduct by the parent, guardian or other custodian that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk, including evidence of the parent’s, guardian’s or other custodian’s use of alcohol or a controlled substance that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk;

[…]

(5) while subject to compulsory school attendance is habitually and without justification truant from school;

42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6302, Dependent child. “The burden of proof in a dependency proceeding is on the petitioner to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that a child meets that statutory definition of dependency.” E.B., 83 A.3d at 431. “A determination that there is a lack of proper parental care or control may be based upon evidence of conduct by the parent, guardian, or other custodian that places the health, safety or welfare of the child at risk[.]” Id. “The question of whether a child is lacking proper parental care or control so as to be a dependent child encompasses two discrete questions: whether the child presently is without proper parental care and control, and if so, whether such care and control are immediately available.” Id.

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