In the Int. of: Z.A.C.S., a Minor

• Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
• Decided: June 10, 2025
• Docket: 1465 MDA 2024
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

J-A04013-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

IN THE INTEREST. OF: Z.A.C.S., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER : : : : : No. 1465 MDA 2024

Appeal from the Decree Entered September 7, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans' Court at No(s): 2024-0069a

IN THE INTEREST OF: S.A.J., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER : : : : : No. 1466 MDA 2024

Appeal from the Decree Entered September 7, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans' Court at No(s): 2024-0070a

IN THE INTEREST OF: Y.A.M., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER : : : : : No. 1467 MDA 2024

Appeal from the Decree Entered September 7, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans' Court at No(s): 2024-0071a

IN THE INTEREST OF: P.O.J., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA J-A04013-25

: : APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER : : : : : No. 1468 MDA 2024

Appeal from the Decree Entered September 7, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans' Court at No(s): 2024-0072a

BEFORE: LAZARUS, P.J., NICHOLS, J., and SULLIVAN, J.

MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, P.J.: FILED: JUNE 10, 2025

L.S.M. (Mother) appeals from the final decrees, entered in the Court of

Common Pleas of York County, Orphans’ Court Division, terminating her

parental rights to her minor children Z.A.C.S. (born June 2014), Y.A.M. (born

September 2017), P.O.J. (born August 2022), and S.A.J. (born November

2023) (collectively, “Children”) after a hearing before the Honorable N.

Christopher Menges.1 After careful review, we affirm based on Judge Menges’

opinion.

York County Office of Children, Youth, and Families (CYF) became

involved with this family in 2017 as a result of allegations of Z.A.C.S.’s

truancy,2 Mother’s lack of housing and supervision, and Mother’s substance

____________________________________________

1 The rights of the biological fathers of the four children were also terminated.

The fathers are not parties to this appeal.

2 An initial family service plan (FSP) noted Z.A.C.S. had 79 absences and was

46 days truant. See N.T. Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) Hearing, 7/19/24, at 2, Ex.1.

-2- J-A04013-25

abuse and mental health issues. In January 2022, CYF filed a dependency

petition, which was later withdrawn.

In January 2023, CYF received a new referral regarding allegations of

abandonment. Z.A.C.S., along with two younger siblings,3 was found in a

motel room without Mother; the referral also alleged that there was

“marijuana, crack, and a scale” observed in the room with the children. See

N.T. TPR Hearing, supra at 2, Ex. 1. Mother was later located at the back of

the motel. Mother was arrested, charged with endangering the welfare of

children, and faced additional drug charges.

At the time of her arrest, Mother had fifteen outstanding warrants.

Mother is currently out on bail, continues to reside at the Red Roof Inn in York

City, and reports that she is employed at OSM Worldwide and works Monday

through Friday, eight hours each day.

At a shelter care hearing, the godmother of one of Mother’s children

offered to be a resource for all three children. CYF recommended Children’s

physical and legal custody remain with the agency for placement with this

individual as emergency kinship caregiver. All parties agreed to this

arrangement.

3 At this point, S.A.J. had not yet been born.

-3- J-A04013-25

On January 18, 2023, Z.A.C.S., Y.A.M., and P.O.J. were adjudicated

dependent.4 The initial goal was return to parent or guardian. Four family

service plans (FSP) were prepared for the family—on July 13, 2021, January

26, 2023, July 24, 2023, and January 5, 2024. See N.T. TPR Hearing, supra

at 13-14. Mother’s goals were as follows: maintain safe, stable housing for

Children; maintain employment; complete drug and alcohol evaluations and

testing and follow through with recommendations; cooperate with in-home

team and early intervention; and complete a mental health evaluation.

In a June 21, 2023 permanency review order, the court found no

compliance by Mother. In a December 7, 2023 permanency review order, the

court found Mother had minimally complied with the permanency plan.

On December 4, 2023, CYF received a general protective services

referral regarding S.A.J., who had been born on November 30, 2023. Mother

had signed herself and S.A.J. out of the hospital on December 3, 2023, against

medical advice. S.A.J. had a slightly raised bilirubin level, which caused

concerns, as an elevated bilirubin level may require treatment for jaundice.

S.A.J. was to be seen by the hospital within two days of his discharge;

however, Mother cancelled the appointment and rescheduled it for December

8, 2023. On December 5, 2023, CYF filed an emergency application for

4 CYF’s petition incorrectly avers the children were adjudicated dependent on

November 18, 2023. See Petition for Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights, 4/29/24, at 4.

-4- J-A04013-25

protective custody of S.A.J., which was granted. S.A.J. was adjudicated

dependent on December 18, 2023, with an initial goal of reunification.

On March 6, 2024, following a status review, the court confirmed its

prior adjudications of dependency of Children and changed the placement

goals to adoption.

On April 29, 2024, CYF filed petitions for involuntary termination of

parental rights with respect to all four Children. The court directed that

counsel enter into Stipulations of Counsel;5 after counsel complied with the

court’s order, the court held termination hearings on July 19, 2024 and

September 6, 2024. At the hearings, the court heard testimony from Abbie

Fulton, Catholic Charities; Ellie Williams, executive director and lead mental

health therapist at EquiTeam Support Services; Susan Scott, program director

at PA Child Support Services; and Tanner Swarr, CYF caseworker. The court

also interviewed Z.A.C.S. and Y.A.M. in camera.

At the time of the hearings, the three oldest children had been in

placement for 20 months and S.A.J. for 7 months. Mother had been

incarcerated on and off throughout the case and had not completed her court-

ordered permanency plan goals.

Following the hearing, the court entered decrees terminating Mother’s

parental rights to Children. See Final Decrees, 9/7/24. Mother filed timely

5 The Stipulations of Counsel were filed on July 15, 2024, and admitted into

the record. See N.T. TPR Hearing, supra at 15.

-5- J-A04013-25

notices of appeal.6 Both Mother and the trial court have complied with

Pa.R.A.P. 1925. Mother raises the following issue7 on appeal:

Whether the trial court erred in terminating [Mother’s] parental rights to [Children] without clear and convincing evidence that termination best served the physical and emotional needs and welfare of [Children] under 23 Pa.C.S.A. [§§] 2511(a)(1), [(2), (5), (8), and (b)].

Brief of Appellant, at 4.

In a proceeding to terminate parental rights involuntarily, the burden of proof is on the party seeking termination to establish by clear and convincing evidence the existence of grounds for doing so. The standard of clear and convincing evidence is defined as testimony that is so “clear, direct, weighty[,] and convincing as to enable the trier of fact to come to a clear conviction, without hesitance, of the truth of the precise facts in issue.” It is well[- ]established that a court must examine the individual circumstances of each and every case and consider all explanations offered by the parent to determine if the evidence[,] in light of the totality of the circumstances[,] clearly warrants termination.

In re Adoption of S.M., 816 A.2d 1117, 1122 (Pa. Super. 2003) (citation

omitted). See also In re C.P., 901 A.2d 516, 520 (Pa. Super. 2006) (party

seeking termination of parental rights bears burden of proving by clear and

convincing evidence that at least one of eleven grounds for termination under

section 2511(a) exists and that termination promotes emotional needs and

welfare of child set forth in section 2511(b)).

6 By order dated October 25, 2024, this Court consolidated Mother’s appeals,

sua sponte. See Pa.R.A.P. 513.

7 In her brief, Mother presents two separate claims, both raising the same issue.

-6- J-A04013-25

We review a trial court’s decision to involuntarily terminate parental

rights for an abuse of discretion or error of law. In re A.R., 837 A.2d 560,

563 (Pa. Super. 2003). Our scope of review is limited to determining whether

the trial court’s order is supported by competent evidence. Id.

After a careful review of the record, the briefs on appeal, and the

relevant case law, we find no abuse of discretion, A.R., supra, and we agree

with the trial court that CYF presented clear and convincing evidence to

terminate Mother’s parental rights under sections 2511(a) and (b). We rely

upon Judge Menges’ thorough and well-reasoned opinion to affirm the order

terminating Mother’s parental rights. See Trial Court Opinion, 11/6/24, at 14-

28 (with regard to Z.A.C.S., Y.A.M., and P.O.J., finding termination proper

under subsections 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(8), and (b) where CYF

offered clear and convincing evidence that: Mother failed to perform parental

duties and was unable to remedy conditions leading to Children’s placement;

Mother has caused Children to be without essential parental care and

conditions and causes of neglect will not be remedied; Children have been

removed from Mother’s care for more than six months and it is “not clear that

Mother will be able to remedy these conditions in a reasonable time,” id. at

19; Children have been removed from Mother’s care for at least twelve months

and conditions that led to removal continue to exist and termination best

serves Children’s needs and welfare; termination would best serve Children’s

developmental, physical, and emotional needs and welfare; Z.A.C.S. and

Y.A.M. have “a wonderful and healthy relationship” with kinship placement

-7- J-A04013-25

and pre-adoptive resource has been identified; Z.A.C.S.’s bond with Mother

“not healthy;” Y.A.M.’s and P.O.J.’s bonds with Mother “familiar but not

parental;” P.O.J. bonded to resource parent, who is pre-adoptive resource;

and, maintaining bond with Mother does not serve Children’s developmental,

physical, and emotional needs); id. at 16-18, 23-28 (with regard to S.A.J.,

finding termination proper under subsection 2511(a)(2) and (b) where CYF

offered clear and convincing evidence that Mother has caused S.A.J. to be

without essential parental care and conditions and causes of neglect will not

be remedied; termination would best serve S.A.J.’s developmental, physical,

and emotional needs and welfare as S.A.J. has no parental bond with Mother

and is bonded to resource parents, who are pre-adoptive resource).

We instruct the parties to attach a copy of Judge Menges’ opinion in the

event of further proceedings in the matter.

Decrees affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Benjamin D. Kohler, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 6/10/2025

-8- # 58 0pin{late +58 OpinCIrculated 05/2102025 10 40 AM 05/21/2025 10:40

IN THE TIIE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA ORPHAN'S ORPHAN'S COURT COURT DIVISION DIVISION

IN IN THE INTEREST INTEREST OF: O. No.: 2024-0069 No.: 2024-0069 Z.A.C.S., Z.A.CS., AA MINOR MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., L.S.M., MOTHER : 1465 1465 MDA 2024 MDA 2024

IN THE INTEREST OF: INTEREST Op No.: No,: 2024-0070 2024-0070 S.A.J., A A MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S-.M., L.S.M., MOTHER MOTHER : 1466 1466 MDA MDA 2024

OF: IN THE INTEREST Op. No.: No. 2024-0071 Y.A.M A MINOR Y.A.M., A MINOR . en,• _ 124 4N0244.16 m 1

C 08PHIS' GUJRT -R PA . •-9U *: 9 - l Oti1;:4 : YS

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., APPEAL OF: L.S.M,, MOTHER MOTHER 1467 MDA 2024

IN IN THE INTEREST INTEREST OF: No.: No.: 2024-0072 2024-0072 P.O.J., P.0.J., A A MINOR MINOR TPR TPR

APPEAL APPEAL OF: L.S.M., L.S.M., MOTHER MOTHER 1468 MDA 2024

MEMORANDUM OPINION IN SUPPORT OE OF ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1925(a(2(i) 1925(a)(2)(ii) OF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES OE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

AND NOW, this 4t" 4" day of November, 2024, the court is in receipt of

Mother's Mother's Notice of Appeal Appeal and Concise Statement Statement of Errors Complained Complained of of Pursuant Pursuant

to Rule of Appellate Procedure Procedure 1925(a) filed on October 4, 2024. The court hereby

1 reaffirms reaffirms its order entered on September 6, 2024, 2024, after aahearing hearing to to involuntarily involuntarily

terminate parental rights before The The Honorable Honorable N. Christopher Christopher Menges. Menges. The court

determined determined itit was was in best interest in Children's best interest to to involuntarily involuntarily terminate terminate parental parental

rights of Mother and the three Fathers.'

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY IHISTORY

This This appeal involves involves Mother's Mother's four four children: ten-year-old Z.A.C:S., whose ten-year-old Z.A.C.S., whose

father is R.R.S; seven-year-old Y.A.M., whose father is J.W., Jr. and; two-year-old two-year-old

and. eleven P.O.J. and eleven month old S.A.I,, month old S.A.J., whose whose father father is is D.J.J. DJ.J. Parties stipulate that Parties stipulate that

Mother Mother has has been been involved involved with with the the York York County County Office Office of of Children, Youth Youth and

Families Families ("the ("the Agency" or "CYF") since 2017 due Agency" or"CYF") due to to concerns regarding allegations regarding allegations

of Z.A.C.S.'s truancy, Mother's lack of housing housing and supervision, supervision, and Mother's

substance abuse and mental mental health health issues. issues. Stip. Stip. (Y.A.M.), (Y.A.M.), 07/15/2024, at at ¶ 7. 7.

Regarding Z.A.C. S..'s truancy, an initial family Z.A.C.S.'s family service plan plan from July July 2021 noted

Child, had seventy-nine that Child seventy-nine absences and was forty-six days truant. Termination forty-six days

(TPR) Hr'g, 7/19/2024, Ex. 1, at 2. Claims were noted as valid due to Mother not I, at

having having stable housing housing and internet issues. Id. intemet issues. Id. It was noted noted that "Mother has has resided resided

with with aa friend, Days Days Inn, Inn, Bell Bell Shelter, Shelter, and back to to Days Inn throughout the Inn throughout the

assessment." assessment." Id. The case was was accepted accepted for for services. In January 2022, In January 2022, aadependency dependency

'Fathers are incarcerated and did not appeal the termination of parental rights. rights

2 petition was was filed filed regarding regarding Z.A.C.S., Z.A.C.S., but but the the petition petition was was withdrawn withdrawn the following the following

month without prejudice and court supervision ended. Id. Id

The The relevant relevant history began with history began with anew referral to a new referral to the the Agency on January Agency on January 3, 3,

2023, 2023, regarding allegations of regarding allegations of Mother's abandonment of Mother's abandonment of the three oldest the three oldest children. children. 2

Id. The three oldest children children were found in the Red Roof Inn without Mother being being

present and with no supplies. Id. Id. Allegations Allegations were that "there was marijuana, marijuana, crack,

and a and a scale observed in scale observed in the the hotel hotel room room with the children." with the children." Id. Mother Mother was was found at found at

the the back back of the the hotel, hotel, and and she she could not not provide explanation for provide an explanation why the illegal for why illegal

substances and paraphernalia paraphernalia were were in her her motel motel room. room. Stip. Stip. (Y.A.M.), (Y.A.M.),¶ I1. 11. Mother Mother

was arrested and charged charged with Endangering Endangering the Welfare of Children and itit * was

outstanding warrants at the time. Id. Mother also reported that Mother had fifteen outstanding

faced charges of faced charges of Possession with with Intent Intent to Deliver, Deliver, Drug Drug Paraphernalia, Paraphernalia, and Small Small

Amount of Marijuana for Personal Use. The Agency had received seven referrals

regarding Mother for substance abuse. Id., Id.,¶ 11. 1.

The Agency filed an application for emergency emergency protective custody, which was protective custody,

January 3, granted on January 3, 2023. Subsequently, the 2023. Subsequently, the three oldest children children were adjudicated were adjudicated

dependent on January dependent January 18, 2023. stipulate that at the 2023. Parties stipulate the time adjudication, time of adjudication,

Z.A.C.S's attendance record showed: "27 record showed: "27 unlawful unlawful absences, 21 tardies, tardies, 55excused

and 16 16 unlawful unlawful [absences], [absences], [and] [and] 2 days early 2 days early dismissal." Stip. (Z.A.C.S.), dismissal." Stip. (Z.A.C.S.), 114. 14.

Youngest child, S.A.J., youngest 2 S.AA,, had not been born yet. yet

3 the current permanency goal The court set the goal as return to parent parent or guardian guardian and the

adoption. concurrent goal as adoption.

Regarding youngest Child, S.A.J., the Agency received aageneral protective protective

services referral for him because, after his birth on November 30, 2023, 2023, Mother left

the hospital with Child against medical advice on December 3, 3; 2023. Child had aa

slightly raised bilirubin level which could require require treatment for jaundice jaundice -if it

continued to rise. rise. Stip. Stip. (S.A.J.), (S.A.J.), 7/15/2024, 7/15/2024, '¶ 10. 10. Mother Mother tested tested positive positive for for

marijuana two days prior S.A.J.'s birth. Id. Child was removed from Mother's prior to S.A.J's

care on December 5, 2023, 2023, two two days after leaving leaving the the hospital, hospital, and was later later

adjudicated dependent on December 18, 2023.

Mother was provided provided with services pursuant pursuant to reunification but after twenty

the youngest months of adjudication for the oldest three children and four months for the

child, return to Mother is still not imminent and amended petitions petitions to terminate

parental parental rights rights were filed on May May 6, 2024 for the oldest three children. A A petition petition to

terminate Mother's rights rights to the youngest youngest child's was filed on April April 29, 2024. A A

termination of parental rights hearing hearing was held on July 19, I9, 2024 and September 6,

2024.

At the first day of the termination hearing, Abbie Fulton of Catholic Charities

testified that the organization organization had opened services on January 18, 2023 and closed

services unsuccessfully on April 10, 2023. There were no concerns with supervised

4 4 visits at that time, but Mother's progress was minimal due to such aashort period period of

time.

Next, Ellie Ellie Williams Williams of of EquiTeam EquiTeam Support Services testified testified that the two two

oldest children, Z.A.C.S. and Y.A.M. are both receiving receiving weekly weekly therapy. therapy. Ms.

Williams testified that she is working with the girls on behaviors, boundaries,

developmental trauma, and initially initially on parentification parentification with Z.A.C.S. Tr., Tr., 7/19/2024, 7/19/2024,

at 34. 34. Ms. Ms. Williams Williams testified testified that Z.A.C.S. has has improve improve significantly significantly in in relation relation to to

be be parentified, parentified, and she has has aahealthier healthier relationship relationship with her her sister sister Y.A.M. Y.A.M. Id. Ms. Ms.

Williams Williams testified that that the the girls, the two oldest children, love love their their mother mother and and want want

to live with her, and if they cannot live with her, they aunt; they want to live with their aunt,

their their resource resource parent. parent, Ms: Ms. Williams had not Williams had not seen the the girls girls interact interact with with Mother Mother

enough to testify regarding any bond the children may may have with her. Id., Id., at 40.

However, However, she was was able to to testify that that that girls were bonded bonded to their their aunt. aunt.

Susan Scott Program Director of PA Child also testified that they opened they opened

services with Mother the first time on November 13, 2023 and closed on March 7,

2024 due learning of Mother's upcoming incarceration. During those months of

service, Mother's fully supervised visits were two days per per week for two hours. Ms.

Scott also Scott also testified regarding the testified regarding the parentified parentified behaviors of Y.A.M. behaviors of and to Y.A.M. and to a greater agreater

extent, Z.A.C.S., who behaves more in aarole of tending tending her younger younger siblings, rather

than than just just playing playing with with them. Tr., 7/19/2024, at 55-57. 55-57. Ms. Ms. Scott testified testified that that

5 5 Z.A.C.S. often picked up the baby, P.O.J., and once tripped tnpped and fell while holding holding

him, him, raising raising safety concerns. concerns. Id., Id., at 55. 55. The 'The parentified parentified behaviors behaviors were observed observed in

Mother's presence. For example, Ms. Scott testified that, during during one visit, visit, Y.A.M

began screaming from the bathroom, and staff ran to see what was going going on. Id., Id., at

57. However, Mother told Z.A.C.S. to go go check on Y.A.M. Id. Id Staff had to redirect

Mother and explain that she needed to come to the bathroom. Id. Id

Ms. Ms. Scott testified testified that that Mother had on-going attendance concerns, had on-going concerns, such as

missed missed visits visits for for various various reasons and was reasons and was placed on aaconfirmation placed on confirmation policy policy requiring requiring

her to confirm her attendance on the day of each visit. Tr., 9/6/2024, at 58. During During

the first time PA Child was providing providing services, Mother brought gifts for brought Christmas gifts

the children and brought brought clothing, shoes, and and toys. toys. Id., Id., at 74-75. Mother Mother did not not bring bring

supplies, such as diapers meals or supplies, diapers.

After After Mother's Mother's second incarceration, PA opened services PA Child opened services a a second time

on July 1, I, 2024, approximately two months after the filing filing of the termination

petitions. Id., at 59. Since opening for the second time, Ms. Scott testified that

Mother's Mother's visits visits were decreased to were decreased once per to once week for per week one hour. for one hour. There There had had only only been been

three visits by the second day of the termination hearing hearing and Mother had attended

each. Id. Ms. Scott testified that Mother continued to bring bring snack foods and drinks

for the children rather than aameal and supplies, such as diapers. diapers. However, Ms. Scott

was not not sure if Mother Mother had had ever been been told that that this this was expected of her. was expected her. Id., Id., at at 72-

66 73. Ms. Scott testified that she still could not recommend going going to unsupervised unsupervised

visits or expanded visits or expanded visits visits because of the because of the adjustment adjustment period period needed needed for for the children. the children.

Id., Id., at 64. Ms. Scott noted that the biggest concern at this point point is making making sure that

the two girls are not stepping into parental roles with their younger younger brothers. Id., at

80.

Next, Tanner Swarr, caseworker for the Agency Agency testified. Ms. Swarr has been

assigned to Mother's case since the referral in in January January 2023. Ms. Tanner testified

that Mother is on supervised bail for her pending pending charges. charges. Tr.,' Tr., 7/19/2024, at 86. She

testified regarding the sporadic sporadic visitation that has occurred over the course of the

reunification period, reunification period, noting Mother's many noting Mother's changes of many changes address, incarcerations, of address, and incarcerations, and

time on the run run in Florida. Florida.

BY ATTORNEY MILLER Q. As it relates to the mother, since the adjudication of adjudication of dependency, dependency, what addresses do what addresses do we have as we have as it relates for her? A. January 4th of 2023, Red Roof Inn. March 26th of 2023, 660 West West Princess Princess Street, Unit Unit 1, I, York, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17401. May 16th I6th of 2023 reported reported to be out of state at an unknown location. June 7th of 2023 reported during aavisit to her children she was in Miami. Then on June 16th of 2023 she was at 3400 Concord Road, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17404. THE COURT: That was at York County Prison? THE WITNESS: It It is. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. Go ahead. THE WITNESS: August 19th I9th of 2023, 921 North Pine Street, York, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17403. December 5th of 2023, 41 415 5 South Court Avenue, York, PA PA 7 17401 On March 6th of2024 17401. of 2024 at York County Prison. We were informed when she was released from prisonprison and that she is staying at the Red Roof Inn currently. she is staying at the Red Roof Inn currently.

Id., at at 88, 89.

Ms. Ms. Swarr Swarr testified that sporadic testified that sporadic visits visits were were sometimes because of sometimes because of active active

warrants and Mother's fear of being being picked picked up, though the Agency up, even though Agency indicated to

Mother Mother that itit does not not typically typically notify notify sheriffs about warrants except in warrants except in the the case of

aa high high crime. Id., 93. Since the adjudications of dependency, Id., at 93. dependency, Mother Mother never

progressed progressed to to unsupervised unsupervised or partially partially unsupervised unsupervised visitation. visitation. Id., Id., at 92-93; Tr., 92-93; Tr.,

9/6/2024, at 55.

The Agency Agency requested that that Mother Mother maintain maintain safe, stable stable housing housing for

Children; maintain employment; complete complete aadrug drug and alcohol evaluation and drug drug

and alcohol testing to eliminate substance abuse concerns; follow follow through through with any with any

recommendations; cooperate with an in-home team and early early intervention; intervention; and

have aamental health evaluation. Mother was asked to provide provide evidence of

compliance to include paystubs, aalease, releases, ete. etc. TPR Hr'g, Hr' g, 7/19/2024, Ex. 2 2

at at 11, 14, 16. H, 14, 16. However, However, Mother Mother did did not not maintain maintain employment employment or housing. Mother or housing. Mother

declined services with Early Intervention for P.O.J. P.OJ. that had been court-ordered,

and the Agency had to step in and consent. Id., Ex. 3, at 3. Additionally, Additionally, Mother

did not cooperate with drug testing. For example, prior prior to the filing filing of the TPR

petition, petition, Mother's Mother's call-in compliance rate with with Averhealth adjudication was Averhealth since adjudication was

8 8 only 3%. Tr., 7/19/2024, at 96. Mother no-showed sixty-six sixty-six times. Since the

beginning of January 2024, her call-in compliance compliance rate was 25%. Icy., Id., at 44. 44, After

the filing of the filing of the the TPR TPR petitions and after petitions and after Mother's Mother's most most recent release from recent release from

incarceration, her call-in compliance rate was 91 91%% in July July 2024, and 92% in

July and August 2024. Mother tested positive for alcohol on five occasions in July

August 2024 and August 2024 and once once for THC through for THC through Probation Probation and once through and once through Averheath Averheath in in

September. September 3, 2024, three days before the final day of the termination hearing. hearing. Only Only

as of August 25, 2024, about two weeks before the final day day of the termination

hearing, hearing, Mother Mother got got her her medical medical marijuana card and marijuana card and provided provided notice notice to the agency to the agency

the following following day. Three weeks before the last day day of the TPR hearing, hearing, Mother

reached out to the Agency, Agency, after her second incarceration, and asked for aamental

health A referral health evaluation. A referral was made made to to Hugh Hugh Smith Associates. Ms. Ms. Swarr

testified testified that that approval approval is is pending pending with with insurance insurance to to complete complete the the evaluation. evaluation. Tr.,

7/19/2024 7/19/2024,;at 96. Likewise, Likewise, regarding regarding housing, housing, Mother Mother testified testified that that the day before the day

the the TPR hearing hearing she received approval approval for for aavoucher voucher that that will will provide provide her with

rental rental assistance for a assistance for afew few months. months. However, However, she she still still now needs to now needs to find find aahome. home.

Finally, Finally, Mother Mother has has been employed employed full time at aaStarbucks Starbucks factory factory for for three three weeks weeks

prior prior to to the the final day of the final day the TPR hearing. hearing.

Mother Mother testified and then testified and addressed the then addressed court directly the court directly at at the the close of the close of TPR the TPR

hearing. Mother told the court that she knew that she had made aalot of mistakes

99 while her'children her children were in placement, mainly from being being scared. Tr., 9/6/2024, at

89. Mother acknowledged wasting wasting aalot of time with being being on the run. Id., at 90.

Mother Mother noted the progress progress she has has made made in in the the weeks weeks since release release from from her her

second incarceration and that she has taken care of the jail jail time and her fines.

Mother Mother indicated indicated that that she loves loves her her kids kids and is is ready ready to to work work toward toward getting getting them them

back. back

Although the Although the court believes that that Mother loves loves her her children and and has has made made

recent progress, recent progress, the court noted the court noted that that Mother Mother had had not not made made enough enough progress. progress. After After

dependency for twenty months of dependency for the the three three oldest children children and over ten months months for for

the the youngest child, Mother Mother still still has has pending charges related pending charges related to endangering her to endangering her

children, which which may require require aalonger longer term term of of separation. separation. Mother Mother has not not

demonstrated the the necessary stability with missed visits. Mother still needs necessary stability to needs to

complete a a mental mental health evaluation any recommendations evaluation and any recommendations that may may result. result.

Mother still does not have housing, although she has now secured financial housing, and although

assistance with initial rent payments, it is not clear to the court bow long it may how long may

take to find take to find appropriate appropriate housing. housing. Meanwhile, Meanwhile, the children's need the children's for permanency need for permanency

continues. The second youngest child, P.O.J., P.OJ,, was adjudicated adjudicated dependent dependent at around

'five five months old, and the baby, S.A.JI., S.A.J., was removed from Mother's care within his

first week and has only known the resource parent parent as his parental parental figure. figure. The court

10 explained that explained that its focus must its focus must be on the be on the best best interest of the interest of children and the children and granted granted

termination. This appeal appeal followed.

ISSUES ON APPEAL

Mother's concise statement are as follows:

1. I. York York County Office of Children Youth and Families Families ... failed to .failed present clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother's Mother 's parental rights rights best served the physical physical and emotional needs and welfare of the minor child under 23 Pa.C.S. [§§] Pa.C.S. [$$] 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5) and 2511(a)(), (a)02), and (a)(8) (a)(8) and and [§] 2511(b). [$] 2511(). 2. The trial court erred in terminating Mother's parental rights to the minor child without clear and convincing evidence that termination best served the physical and emotional fl [] needs and welfare of the minor child under 23 Pa.C.S. [§§] 2511(a)(1), Pa.C.S. [$$] (a)(2), (a)(5) and (a)02), and (a)(8) and [§] (a)(8) and [$] 2511(b). 2511().

DISCUSSION DISCUSSION

The standard of The standard of review review by by the Superior Court the Superior Court of of an an appeal appeal from from aadecree decree

terminating terminating parental parental rights rights is is limited determining whether limited to determining whether the decision of the the trial trial

court is supported supported by competent evidence. In re K. C. W.,456 K.CW., 456 Pa. Super. Super. 1, I, 689 A.2d

294, 298 298 ((1997). 1997). Absent an abuse of discretion, discretion, an error of law, law, or insufficient

evidentiary support evidentiary support for the the trial trial court's decision, the the decree must must stand. stand. Id. Id. Where Where a a

trial court has granted granted aa petition petition to involuntarily involuntarily terminate parental parental rights, rights, the

Superior Court Court must must accord the the trial judge's decision the trial judge's the same given to same deference given to aa

jury jury verdict. verdict. In re Child M., 452 452 Pa. Super. 230, Pa. Super. 230, 681 681 A.2d A.2d 793, 800 ((1996). 793, 800 1996). The The

Superior Court Superior Court employs employs a acomprehensive comprehensive review of the review of the record record to determine whether to determine whether

11 the trial court's decision is supported by competent evidence. In re Matsock, 416 Pa.

Super. 520, 520,_611 611 A.2d 737, 742 742 ((1992). 1992). The The "[p]ermissible grounds for involuntary "[plemissible grounds involuntary

termination termination of parental parental rights rights are specified in 23 Pa.C.S.A. are specified Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511," as as discussed

above. In re C.S., above. 2000 Pa. C.S., 2000 Super 318, Pa. Super ¶¶ 8-9, 761 318, 8-9, 761 A.2d A.24 1197, 1197, 1199-200 1199--200 (Pa. Super. (Pa. Super.

a. Ct. 2000). 2000).

Importantly, Importantly, the only find the court must only find one factor factor pursuant pursuant to to 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.C.SA. §$

2511(a) to terminate parental parental rights. rights. The relevant 2511 sections to Mother's appeal appeal

are as are as follows: follows:

(a) General rule. — The rights rule. -The rights of aaparent parent in regard regard to a a child may may be terminated terminated after aapetition petition filed filed on any any of the the following following grounds: grounds:

(1)The parent by conduct continuing for aaperiod of at least six (I)The months immediately immediately preceding preceding the filing of the the filing the petition petition either has has evidenced evidenced aa settled purpose purpose of relinquishing relinquishing parental parental claim toto a a child child or has has refused refused or failed failed to to perform perform parental parental duties. duties.

(2) The The repeated repeated and continued incapacity, incapacity, abuse, abuse, neglect neglect or refusal refusal of of the the parent parent has has caused caused the child to the child to be without essential parental without essential parental care, control care, control or or subsistence subsistence necessary necessary for for his his physical or mental physical or mental well-being well-being and the conditions and causes of the incapacity, incapacity, abuse, abuse, neglect neglect or or refusal refusal cannot or will will not not be remedied remedied by by the the parent. parent.

The child (5) The (5) child has has been been removed removed from the care from the care of of the the parent parent by by the the court or under aavoluntary agreement with an agency voluntary agreement agency for aaperiod of at least six months, the conditions which led to the removal or placement placement ofof the the child continue to exist, the to exist, the parent parent cannot cannot or will will not not remedy remedy those those conditions within within aareasonable reasonable period period of time, time, the the services services or assistance assistance reasonably reasonably available available to thethe parent parent are not not likely likely to to remedy remedy the the conditions conditions which which led led to to the the removal removal or placement placement of the the child child within within aareasonable reasonable period period of of

12 time and termination of the time the parental rights rights would would best serve the the needs and welfare of the child.

(8) The child has been removed from the care of the parent parent by by the court or under a a voluntary agreement with an agency, 12L2 months or more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child continue to exist and termination of parental parental rights rights would best serve the the needs needs and welfare of of the the child.

(b) Other considerations. considerations. --The --The court in terminating terminating the rights of aa the nghts parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, developmental, physical and emotional needs and welfare of the child.

23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(1), 23 Pa.C.S.A. 2511(a)61), (2), (2), (5), and (b). (5), and (b).

The court The court determined determined York York County Children Youth County Children Youth and and Families Families presented presented

clear and convincing evidence to the court that termination of Mother's parental parental

rights best served Child's emotional needs and welfare under 23 Pa.C.S.A. $$ §§ 2511

(a)(1), (2), and (a)(), and (8) and and §$ 2511(b) of the Adoption Act.

I. I. Termination of of parental parental rights rights is is warranted warranted under section (a)(1). under section (a)(1).

There are clearly.grounds clearly grounds to to terminate terminate Mother's parental parental rights rights under 23 23 Pa.C.S.

$§2511(a)(1). Under section section (a)(1), (a)(1), the moving party party in terminating terminating parental parental rights rights

must show the parent, by conduct continuing continuing for aaperiod of at least six months

immediately preceding filing of the petition, preceding the filing petition, either has evidenced a a settled

purpose purpose of relinquishing relinquishing parental parental claim to aachild or has has refused refused or or failed failed to perform perform

parental parental duties. 23 23 Pa. Pa. C.S. §$ 2511(a)(1). The focus focus of this this subsection subsection is is on the the

conduct of conduct of the the parent. parent. In re BL.L., B.L.L., 787 787 A.2d A.2d 1007, 1007, 1013 1013 (Pa.Super. 2001) (citation (Pa.Super. 2001) (citation

13 omitted). Although the six months before a a petition is -filed are critical to aa

determination, aacourt considering termination of parental rights must weigh the

history of the case and determine if termination is warranted on a atotality totality of the

circumstances. circumstances. In re B., N.M., 856 A.2d 847, 855 855 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2004). 2004). A A parent parent must

make a "sincere and genuine effort" to maintain aarelationship, use all available

resources to preserve the bond, and resist obstacles. In re B., N.M., NM., 856 A.2d 847,

855 (Pa.Super. 855 (Pa.Super. 2004). The Supreme Court has stated:

There is no simple or easy easy definition of parental parental duties. Parental duty duty is best understood understood in relation to the needs of a a child. A A child needs love, protection, guidance, and support. These needs, physical and emotional, cannot be met by aa merely passive passive interest in the development of the child. Thus, this court has held that the parental parental obligation is aapositive duty which requires affirmative performance. This affirmative duty duty ..... requires continuing interest in the child and aa genuine genuine effort to to maintain maintain communication and association association with with the the child. Because aa child needs more than aabenefactor, parental parental duty duty requires that aaparent parent `'exert exert himself to take and maintain aaplace place of importance in the child's life.'

In In Interest ofA.P., Interest of A.P., 692 A.2d 240,245 A.2d 240, 245 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 1997) 1997) (citing (citing In In re re Burns, Burns, 379 379 A.2d A.2d

535 (Pa. 535 (Pa. 1977)).

Analyzing 23 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.CS.A. §$ 2511(a)(1) in in relation relation to to this this case, case, itit is is clear from from

the record that CYF offered clear and convincing evidence that Mother has refused

or failed to perform parental duties for at least six months immediately immediately preceding preceding

the filing of the petition to terminate her parental rights rights to the three oldest children.

At termination, Mother had supervised visits for one hour each week, which never

14 progressed to unsupervised or partially unsupervised, unsupervised, and which had to be decreased

due to Mother's absences from Children while on the run and during during periods periods of

incarceration. Mother's incarcerations, time out of state, and refusal to attend certain

visits if all the children could not be present, present, for example, example, presented presented aahindrance to

her ability to perform parental duties. Due to Mother's Mother's challenges challenges with multiple multiple

incarcerations, lack of housing, housing, and lack of employment, employment, Mother was not able to

provide either the physical or emotional support that Children needed.

The court did hear testimony that Mother brought brought items for Children to visits, visits,

Christmas gifts, and initially initially attended Children's medical and dental appointments. appointments.

However, Mother stopped attending these appointments, saying saying that she no longer longer

received received notice notice and acknowledged that that she did did not inquire inquire about these appointments. these appointments.

Although Mother has made progress after the filing filing of the petition petition to terminate her

parental rights, the court must consider the totality totality of the circumstances. Mother has

not addressed issues on aasystematic or regular basis. The court recognizes recognizes that

Mother Mother has has made made efforts, efforts, but but they they have have not not been diligent and been diligent and sustained efforts. Id., sustained efforts.

at 32. CYF has provided sufficient evidence under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)() 2511(a)(1) that

Mother has failed to perform parental duties for well beyond the previous previous six months

prior to the filing of the petition to terminate parental rights. parental rights.

II. Termination of parental rights is warranted under section section (a)(2). (a)(2),

15 There is sufficient evidence to terminate Mother's parental parental rights rights under 23

Pa.C.S. §$2511(a)02). 2511(a)(2). This subsection can be broken down into three elements: elements: "( 1) "(I)

repeated repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect continued incapacity, neglect or or refusal; refusal; (2) (2) such such incapacity, incapacity,

abuse, neglect neglect or refusal has caused the child to be without essential parental parental care,

necessary for his physical control or subsistence necessary physical or mental well-being; and (3) well-being; and (3) the

causes of the incapacity, incapacity, abuse, neglect neglect or refusal cannot or will not be remedied." In

re Adoption Adoption of M.E.P. 825 A.2d M.E.P. 825 A.2d 1266, 1266, 1272 1272 (Pa.Super. 2003) (citations (Pa.Super. 2003) omitted). (citations omitted).

Unlike subsection subsection (a)(1), subsection "emphasizes the child's present (a(I), this subsection present and future

need need for for essential parental parental care, control or subsistence necessary necessary for for his physical physical or

mental well-being." In re E.A.P., 944 A.2d 79, 82 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2008) (citations (citations

omitted). The omitted). The children children cannot cannot wait wait for for aaparent parent until until he or she he or she is prepared to is prepared take on to take on

parental responsibilities. Id. perform parental Id. at 83. Sincere efforts to perform parental duties can

preserve the rights rights of a a parent under subsection subsection (a)(1) (a)(1) but may may be insufficient as to

capacity to parent under subsection (a)(2). In re Z.P., (a)02). ZP,, 994 A.2d 1108, 1H17 1117

(Pa.Super. 2010) 2010) (citations omitted). (citations omitted)

regard to 23 In regard 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)02) 2511(a)(2) and and this this case, it is is clear from the the record record

that that CYF offered clear and and convincing convincing evidence that neglect and that abuse, neglect and refusal refusal by by

the Mother has caused all four children to be without essential parental parental care

necessary for their mental well-being well-being and the conditions and causes of the abuse,

neglect neglect and refusal refusal will will not be remedied by the parent. remedied by parent. The Court incorporates incorporates its its

16 summary of the facts summary facts in this this case here and and its its answer under under the the previous previous factor. factor. Here, Here,

Mother's Mother's refusal inability to refusal or inability to comply comply with with services, get get evaluations, maintain

employment, maintain consistent visits, or maintain housing housing throughout the

reunification period has caused the children to continue to be without essential

parental parental care for for their mental mental and physical wellbeing. It physical wellbeing. It is is not not clear to to the the Court that that

the the causes of Mother's abuse, abuse, neglect, neglect, or refusal refusal will be be remedied, despite Mother's remedied, despite

recent recent progress progress made after the filing of the filing of the the petition petition for for termination and after the the first

day of the TPR hearing. hearing. Mother was involved with CYF from 2017 to 2022 and from

January 2023 January 2023 to to present. This history present. This certainly calls history certainly calls into question whether into question whether Mother Mother

will be able to remedy the conditions and causes of abuse, neglect, neglect, and refusal by

Mother. Mother did not progress to unsupervised visits with Children who have been

in placement for over twenty months, regarding regarding the oldest three. The youngest youngest child,

S.A.R., was S.A.R., was only only in in Mother's care for Mother's care for aacouple couple of of days days out out of of concern concern for for his his medical medical

well-being and well-being has only and has only known known the resource parent the resource as a parent as a parental parental figure. The court figure. The court

acknowledges that Mother's compliance is better now, after her most recent release

from incarceration aa few weeks prior prior to termination. Yet, the court also heard

testimony during testimony during the adjudicatory period, the adjudicatory period, that Mother Mother had had numerous numerous addresses, was was

incarcerated, went on the run to Florida, and was incarcerated again again after her return.

In twenty months, Mother In twenty Mother has has not not maintained consistent visits, employment, or visits, employment,

housing. Mother housing. Mother has not submitted has not submitted to to aamental mental health evaluation and health evaluation and had had almost almost no no

17 compliance compliance with drug and with drug and alcohol alcohol testing, testing, until until after after the the filing of the filing of termination the termination

petition. petition. Given the amount of time Mother has been receiving receiving services or has been

involved with CYF, her minimal progress, progress, the court remains remains concerned that the

causes of Mother's abuse, neglect neglect or refusal will not be remedied. CYF has provided provided

sufficient evidence sufficient evidence under under 23 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.CS.A. §$ 2511(a)(2) 2511(a)02) that that Mother's Mother's abuse, abuse, neglect neglect

and refusal and refusal has caused Children has caused Children to be without to be essential parental without essential care necessary parental care necessary for for

their mental well-being, well-being, and the conditions and causes of the abuse, neglect, the abuse, neglect, and

refusal will refusal will not be remedied not be by Mother. remedied by Mother.

III: IHI. Termination is warranted under section section (a)(5) (a)(5) for Mother.

grounds to terminate Mother's rights In addition, there are grounds rights under 23 Pa.C.S. §$

2511(a)(5). This subsection can be broken down into five 2511(a)(5). elements: ((I) five elements: 1) the child has

been removed from parental parental care for at least six months; months; (2) (2) the conditions that led

to to the child's removal the child's removal or or placement placement continue continue to exist; (3) to exist; (3) the the parents cannot or parents cannot or will will

not not remedy the conditions remedy the conditions which which led led to to removal or placement removal or placement within within a areasonable reasonable

period of time; period of time; (4) the services (4) the services reasonably reasonably available available to the parents to the are unlikely parents are unlikely to to

remedy remedy the conditions which led to removal or placement placement within aareasonable period period

and (5) of time; and (5) termination of parental parental rights rights would best best serve the needs and welfare

of the child. See In the child. In re re M.E.P., M.E.P., 825 A.2d 1266, 1266, 1273-74 1273-74 (Pa.Super. 2003) (citation (Pa.Super. 2003) (citation

omitted). "[O]nce "[O]nce aachild is is removed removed from from the the care of aaparent, parent, the burden burden is on the the

18 parent parent to to take take action to regain regain parental parental rights." In In the the interest ofB.C., interest of B.C., 36 36 A.3d 601, A.3d 60l,

.609 609 (Pa.Super. 2012) (citation (Pa.Super. 2012) (citation omitted).

Here Here again, the the court incorporates incorporates its its responses responses above. The three oldest

children have have been adjudicated dependent for more more than than six months. months. The The conditions conditions

that led led to to Children's removal, removal, such as lack lack of lack lack of of housing housing and and supervision,

alcohol concerns, mental health concerns, etc., remain. After twenty twenty months, it is not

clear that Mother Mother will will be able able to remedy remedy these these conditions in in aareasonable reasonable time. time.

Although Mother now has aahousing voucher, she still has to find suitable housing

for for herself herself and and four four children. children. Mother Mother still still has comply with aa mental has to comply mental health health

evaluation for for which an an intake intake had had not not been done at the time ' of termination and the time and

comply with any recommendations. Additionally, Mother still has pending pending charges, charges,

and depending on the outcome, Mother may may need to complete complete aathreat of harm

evaluation and work work toward toward any recommendations. recommendations. It It is is likewise likewise not not clear to to the the

court that that the the services services available to to Mother Mother are likely likely to to remedy remedy the the conditions conditions within within

aareasonable time. The court notes that even with the services, Mother has not yet

progressed to having any unsupervised unsupervised or partially partially unsupervised unsupervised visits with her

children. Mother's Mother's absences necessitated aaperiod period of adjustment to to allow Children

time to transition. For example, with the resumption resumption of visits upon upon mother's second

release from incarceration, P.O.J. P.O.J, initially cried and did not want to leave the

resource resource parent. Tr., Tr., 7/19/2024, at 64-65. Additionally, the the resource parents parents reported reported

19 that after the resumption resumption of visits, P.O.J. P.OJ has started hitting hitting after visits, was agitated, agitated,

and was not able to fall asleep. asleep. Tr., 9/6/2024, at 56. Mother has also received services

prior prior to this current referral for similar issues, such as not having having housing housing for the

children-and children and years years later, later, lack lack of housing housing has has persisted. persisted.

Termination Termination serves the needs and welfare of Children who need permanency,

stability, and stability, and support. support. For example, Z.A.C.S, For example, Z.A.C.S, whose whose truancy truancy issues caused her issues caused her to to be be

behind behind in in her classwork, necessitating necessitating that that she attend summer school in in order to to be be

promoted promoted to the the first first grade, grade, made made the the honor honor roll last last year. year. Tr., 9/6/2024, at 33-34.;

TPR Hr'g, Hr'g, 7/19/2024, Ex. 1 I at 2. 2. Additionally, Additionally, she has improved improved in her parentified parentified

behaviors, interacting behaviors, interacting with with her siblings more her siblings as an more as an older older sibling sibling rather rather than than aaparent. parent.

Both Both girls girls continue continue to to receive receive weekly therapy. therapy. Child, P.O.J., P.OJ., continues to to receive receive

occupational occupational and physical physical therapy therapy through Early Early Intervention in the resource home, home,

and S.A.J. is and S.A.J. involved with is involved with Early Early Intervention as well. Intervention as well. All of the All of the children are doing children are doing

well well and have their their needs needs met met with with their their resource resource families families who also make make sure that that

the the children children have have visits visits with with their their siblings. siblings.

III. Termination of parental rights rights is warranted under 23 Pa.C.S.A Pa.CS.A 2511 (g) (8)

Once the the child has has been been removed removed from from the the care of the parent, parent, the burden burden is is on the the

parent parent to to take take action to to regain regain parental parental rights. See In In re Z.P., 2010 PA PA Super 56, 56, 994

A.2d A.2d 1108, 1108, 1118-19 1118-19 (Pa. Super. 20 (Pa. Super. 10) (holding 2010) (holding that parental obligation that parental obligation is is aapositive positive

duty duty which which requires requires affirmative performance). performance). We We do not permit permit parental parental inertia inertia to to

20 toll toll the the permanency permanency needs needs of of the the Child. In In re N.M.B., N.M.B., 2004 2004 PA Super 311, PA Super 311, 856 A.2d A.2d

856 (Pa. 847, 856 (Pa. Super. 2004) 2004) ("[A] ("[A] parent's parent's basic constitutional right right to the custody custody

and rearing and of his rearing of his or or her her child child is converted, upon is converted, upon the the failure failure to to fulfill fulfill his or her his or her

parental duties, to parental duties, to the child's right the child's right to have proper to have proper parenting parenting and and fulfillment of his fulfillment of his or or

her potential in a a permanent, permanent, healthy, environment. "). Although healthy, safe environment."). Although a a parent parent has

cooperated with cooperated with CYS CYS in in providing providing the necessary releases, the necessary releases, when when the the fact fact remains remains that that

the the parent's parent's mental and emotional mental and emotional issues, which require issues, which additional treatment, require additional treatment,

remained unaddressed at the time of the termination hearing, hearing, the issues that lead to

placement ofB. placement continue to exist. In the Interest of C., 36 A.3d 601, 609-610, B.C., 609-610, 2012 Pa. Pa

Super. LEXIS 7, *18, 18, 2012 PA Super Super 7.

When examining claims in When examining in relation to 2511(a)(8), the court follows to Section 2511(a)(8),

established case law. law. In In order to to demonstrate demonstrate that termination termination is proper pursuant is proper pursuant to to

Section 2511(a)(8), 2511(a)(8), CYS must prove prove by by clear and convincing convincing evidence that: that: ((1) 1) the the

child has child has been been removed removed from from the the care of the care of the parent for at parent for at least least twelve twelve months; months; (2) (2)

the conditions that the conditions that led led to to the the removal or placement removal or of the placement of child continue the child continue to exist; and to exist; and

(3) termination of (3)termination of parental parental rights would best rights would best serve serve the the needs and welfare needs and of the welfare of child. the child.

In In re C.L.G., CL.6., 2008 2008 PA Super 198, PA Super 956 A.2d 198, 956 999, 1005 A.2d 999, 1005 (Pa. (Pa. Super. 2008). Super. 2008).

Termination under under Section Section 2511(a)(8) 2511(a)(8) does not not require require the court to to evaluate aa

parent's parent's current willingness ability to remedy willingness or ability remedy the conditions that initially initially caused

placement or the availability or efficacy of CYF services. In h re DA. T., 91 A.3d 197, D.A.T,

21 205, 2014 Pa. Pa. Super. LEXIS LEXIS 228, 228, *19, 19, 2014 PA PA Super Super 86, 86, 2014 2014 WL WL 1687812. 1687812.

Where aaparent parent has has addressed some of the the conditions that led led to to aachild's removal, removal,

but other conditions still exist, this element may may be deemed to be be satisfied. See In In re

C.L.G.; CL.G., 2008 PA Super Super 198, 956 A.2d 999, 1005 1005 (Pa. Super. 2008) (Pa. Super. 2008) (en (en bane). banc).

Under Under 23 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(8), 2511(a)(8), it it is clear clear from from the the record that that CYF offered

convincing evidence that clear and convincing that the the three three oldest children have been removed removed from

the care of the parent parent by the court or under a a voluntary voluntary agreement with an agency, agency,

twelve months or more have elapsed elapsed from the date of removal or placement, placement, the

conditions which which led led to to the the removal removal or placement placement of the the child continue to to exist, and

termination of parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child.

The The three oldest children were adjudicated dependent on January 18, 2023;

therefore, more than twelve months have elapsed elapsed since the Children were removed

from from the the care of Mother. care of The Court Mother. The incorporates its Court incorporates summary of its summary of the the facts. and facts and

answers above regarding regarding the continued existence of conditions that led to to removal. removal.

The Court stresses again again that, at at this this time, time, termination termination would would serve Children's Children's needs needs

and welfare. and welfare. Although, Although, Mother Mother has has made made progress in the progress in the weeks weeks leading to leading to

termination, securing employment, termination, such as securing employment, signing signing up up for for a a housing housing voucher, voucher,

requesting requesting aa mental securing aa medical mental health evaluation, securing medical marijuana marijuana card, and

improving her call-in rate with alcohol and drug improving drug testing, testing, the court may may not consider

these late efforts under this factor. Mother has never progressed progressed to unsupervised

22 visits, and the three oldest children have already been dependent dependent for twenty months.

The children have a a wonderful parental parental bond with the resource parents, parents, and

termination would best serve Children's needs and welfare at this time, as will be

discussed below. Mother has not been able to provide for Children's developmental,

physical, physical, or emotional needs. Child's needs are being being met by by the resource parents. parents.

CYF has provided sufficient evidence under 23 Pa. C.S.A. §$ 2511(a(8) Pa.C.S.A. 2511(a)(8) that

Child has has been removed from the care of the Mother by the court -or under a a

voluntary voluntary agreement with an agency, twelve months or more have elapsed from the

date of removal or placement, placement, the conditions which led to the removal or placement placement

of the child continue to exist,' exist, and termination of parental rights rights would best serve the

needs and welfare of the child.

IV. Termination of parental parental rights rights is in the best interests of Child.

A A court must give primary consideration "to the developmental, developmental, physical and

emotional needs and welfare of the child." 23 Pa.C.S. §$ 2511(b). 2511(b). "Intangibles "Intangibles such

as love, comfort, security, and stability are involved in the inquiry inquiry into needs and

welfare of the child." In re re C.M.S., 884 A.2d 1284, 1287 1287 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2005). The bond

between parent parent and child must be examined, to determine if termination would

destroy an existing, necessary, and beneficial relationship. In In re N.A.M., NA.M., 33 A.3d 95,

103 103 (Pa.Super. 2011) (quoting (Pa.Super 201D) (quoting In re T.B.B.,825 825 A.2d 387 387 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super, 2003)). A A child

has the right right to care in aapermanent, permanent, healthy, healthy, safe environment. See hi In re KM., 53

23 A.2d 781, 792 792 (Pa.Super. 2012) (citing (Pa.Super. 2012) (citing In In re Adoption Adoption of of R.J.S., R.JS., 901 A.2d at 507). 507).

"[T]he mere existence of aabond or attachment of aa child to a "[The a parent will not

necessarily result in the denial of a a termination petition ... courts considering petition ..

termination must also consider whether the children are in a a pre-adoptive home and

whether they have a a bond with their foster foster parents." In In re T.S.M., T.SM.,7171 A.3d 251, 267-

68 (Pa.Super. 68 (Pa.Super. 2013) 2013) (citations (citations omitted). Additionally, Additionally, appellate appellate courts have stated

that the trial court should consider the importance of continuity of relationships relationships and

whether any existing parent-child parent-child bond can be severed without detrimental effects

on the child.

The trial court is not required required by by statute or precedent precedent to order that a a formal

bonding bonding evaluation be performed performed by by an expert. In In re re K.K.R.-S., K.K.R.-S., 2008 PA Super 231, PA Super

958 A.2d 529, 533 (Pa. (Pa. Super. 2008). There are some instances where direct

observation of the interaction between the parent parent and the child is not necessary necessary and

may even be be detrimental to to the the child. Id., Id., 946 A.2d A.2d at 762. 762. This This Court explained that,

in cases where there is no evidence of any bond between the parent parent and child, it is

reasonable to infer that no bond exists. Id. at 763.

As stated in the statute: The court in terminating terminating the rights rights of aaparent parent shall

give primary consideration to the developmental, developmental, physical physical and emotional needs and

welfare of the child. The rights rights of aaparent shall not be terminated solely on the basis

of environmental factors such as inadequate housing, furnishings, furnishings, income, clothing

24 and medical care if found to be beyond beyond the control of the parent. parent. With respect any respect to any

petition petition filed filed pursuant to subsection pursuant to subsection (a)(1), (a)(1), (6) or (8), (6) or (8), the court shall the coun shall not consider not consider

any efforts by the parent parent to remedy remedy the conditions described therein which are first

initiated subsequent to the giving giving of notice of the filing filing of the petition. petition.

In 2023, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued aaruling that clarified for

Pennsylvania trial courts Pennsylvania trial courts that that determinations determinations of of whether whether involuntary involuntary termination termination

meets meets aachild's needs needs and welfare requires requires aamulti-factor analysis that cannot be multi-factor analysis

limited to limited merely whether to merely whether aaparent-child parent-child bond bond exists exists that would be that would be adverse adverse to to

terminate. The terminate. The Court Court . explains explains that that the the multi-factor multi-factor needs and welfare needs and analysis in welfare analysis in

applying a "necessary termination-of-parental-rights cases requires applying "necessary and beneficial"

standard in considering the parent-child parent-child bond as one of those factors.

"But aacourt "But court conducting conducting thethe Section Section 2511(b) needs and 2511(b) needs and welfare analysis welfare analysis must consider more must consider more than than proof proof of of an an adverse adverse or or detrimental detrimental impact impact from from severance severance of of the the parental parental bond. bond. We emphasize analysis We emphasize analysis of of the the parental parental bond is but one partpart of the overall subsection (b) (b) analysis, which includes aa determination of whether the bond is necessary necessary and beneficial beneficial to the child, to the child, i.e., i.e., whether whether maintaining maintaining the the bond serves the bond serves the developmental, physical, child's developmental, physical, and emotional needs and welfare.

The Section 2511(b) inquiry inquiry must also include consideration of other important important factors such as: factors such as: the the child's child's need need for for permanency permanency and and length length of time in foster care ... ; whether the child is in aapre[-] care...; adoptive home pre[-Jadoptive and and bonded bonded with with foster foster parents; parents; and and whether whether the the foster foster home home meets meets the the child's developmental, physical, child's developmental, physical, and emotional emotional needs, needs, including including intangible needs of intangible needs of love, comfort, security, love, comfort, safety, and security, safety, and stability stability... .... The court court must must not not truncate truncate its analysis and its analysis and preclude preclude severance based solely on solely evidence of on evidence of anan "adverse" "adverse" or "detrimental" impact or "detrimental" impact toto the child. the child. Therefore, Therefore, to to grant grant termination termination whenwhen aaparental parental bond exists, there bond exists, there must must

25 be clear and convincing evidence that the bond is not necessary and beneficial.

As we have explained, explained, "an emotional bond" with aa parent parent is legally legally insufficient to preclude termination of parental rights without determining whether such bond is necessary and beneficial to the child and weighing weighing the other factors present in the record. record. Likewise, an "adverse effect" or "detrimental impact" of severance alone cannot demonstrate aa necessary necessary and beneficial bond.

In ofK.T., In the Interest of K.T, 296 296 A.3d 1085, 1085, 1105, 1105, 1113-15 1113-15 (Pa. (Pa. 2023)

In analyzing this case under 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(b), it is clear from the record

that CYF offered clear and convincing evidence that the developmental, physical,

and emotional needs and welfare of Child is best served by terminating parental

rights. rights. Regarding Children's bond, the court heard testimony that the two oldest

children have aawonderful and healthy relationship with their aunt, their kinship kinship

placement and pre-adoptive resource. Tr., 7/19/2024, at 46-47. The resource parent

provides comfort and support. The girls are old enough enough to know mom and they they have

expressed their desire to live with her as their first choice. choice. However, Caseworker

Swarr testified that Z.A.C.S.'s Z.A.CS.'s bond with Mother Mother is not healthy due to the

parentification issue and that Y.A.M. has aafamiliar bond, knowing who Mother is,

but the relationship is not parental. Tr., 9/6/2024, at 14-15. 14-15, The caseworker also

reported tthat hat P.O.J.'s P.O.J's bond with Mother is familiar but not parental parental and noted that

after recent visits he's been defiant, hitting, and spitting. Id., at 15. The caseworker

also testified that S.A.J, S.A.J. does not have aaparental bond with Mother. Child is only

26 about ten months old and has never lived with Mother. Id. The youngest youngest children are

bonded to their resource parents who are their pre-adoptive resource. resource,

Maintaining the bond does not serve the Children's developmental, developmental, physical, physical,

and emotional needs. Unfortunately, Unfortunately, the nature of Mother's instability instability with

employment, housing, sporadic visits, mental health concerns, -etc., impact the

Children's developmental, physical, physical, and and emotional needs. needs. Since January January 18, I8, 2023,

and February 18, I8, 2023, Children's needs have been and are being being addressed by by the

resource resource families families who who are pre-adoptive resources resources for for Children and with with whom whom

Children are bonded. Z.A.C.S.'s improvement in school and with parentification is

aa prime example. Resource parents meet Children's intangible intangible needs for love,

comfort, safety, and stability, stability, as well as, their physical physical and developmental needs

related schooling, therapy, Early Intervention, etc. Although Although the two oldest children

have aaparental bond with Mother, there is clear and convincing evidence on the

record that that . the bond is not necessary or beneficial to Children. The three oldest

children have children have been been in in placement placement for over twenty for over twenty months months as of the as of the date date that that

termination of parental rights was granted. All the Children's need for permanency

is paramount at this time. CYF has provided clear and convincing evidence under

23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.CS.A. §$ 2511(b) that that the the parental bond in in this this case is is not necessary necessary and

beneficial to Child.

27 In summary, CYF provided clear and convincing evidence that termination

best served Child's emotional needs and welfare under 23 Pa.C.S.A. Pa.CS.A. §$ 2511(a)(1), 2511(a)(D),

(a)(2), and (a)02), and (a)(8) (a)(8) and under under §$ 2511(b). Therefore, the Court did not err in finding

grounds for termination under the that Mother's conduct met at least one of the grounds

statute.

In In this case, the court notes notes Mother's Mother's efforts and her current current progress and does does

not doubt doubt that she loves loves Children Children and hopes to to provide for them. them. However, However, in

reviewing termination of parental rights, rights, the Superior Court has stated that "[t]he

court cannot and will not subordinate indefinitely indefinitely aachild's need for permanence permanence and

stability stability to to aaparent's parent's claims of progress and hope hope for for the the future." future." In In re Adoption of

R.J.S., R.JS., 2006 Pa. Super 127, 29, ¶ 29, 901 A.2d A.24 502, 513 513 (Pa. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006). The court

believes that termination is in mn Child best interest at this time.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSION

After review review of the record record and for for the foregoing foregoing reasons, reasons, the court court hereby hereby

reaffirms its order terminating Mother's parental rights entered on September 6,

BY THE COURT,

N.CHRl�GES,JUDGE

N. CHRISTOP R MENGES, JUDGE I 28 I I Kuehne, Heather M.

on sot From: Pent: M. Kuehne, Heather M Wednesday, Wednesday, November 6, 2024 9.04 9:04 AM o: MM@ATTORNEYMARTINMILLER.COM; DAN@WORLEYANDWORLEY.COM; McNaney, MM@ATTORNEYMARTINMILLER.COM, McNaney, Kelly; Cook, David Kelly David; Laura Smith; Kearney, Thomas, Thomas; Scott A. A. Beaverson, Esq. Esq.; Yost, Nancy

"f LL. Subject: Subject: 2024-0069, 2024-0070, 2024-0071 2024 0069, 2024-0070, 2024-0071 8& 2024-0072 2024-0072 ttachments: ttachment:i: scan.pdf scan.pdf

lease see attached opinion. reasa opinion

Best,

Heather M. Kuehne Chief Deputy Clerk of Orphans' Court York County Register of wilts$ Wills & Clerk of of Orphans' out Court York County Judicial Center, 45N.45 N. George George Street, Street, York PA 17401 YORK COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA 717.771.9258 717.771.9258& Direct HMKuehne(cDYorkCountvPA.gov Muhn@'Ya.kGaNDtVAAN umas per°m•Nwru wr v

717.771.9288 Clerk of 0rhas' Court esew.Yakut?AN/Ce00IO-ha.nC.of Orphans' Count www.YorkCountyPA.eov/ClerkOfOrphansCourt

From:: 50LASER13@YORKCOUNTYPA.GOV 50LASERI3@YORKCOUNTYPA.GOV <50 LASE R13 @ YO RKCO UNTYPA.GOV> <50LASER13@VORKCOUNTYPA.GOV> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 9:00 AM J nt: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 9.00 AM To: To: Kuehne, Heather M. M. < HMKuehne@yorkcountypa.gov> Subject: