# In the Int of: N.B., Appeal of: T.W.

> Superior Court of Pennsylvania · February 26, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807447

## Case

- **Court:** Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** February 26, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Panella
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807447

## Opinion text

J-S06001-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

IN THE INTEREST OF: N.B., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
APPEAL OF: T.W., MOTHER :
:
:
:
: No. 1303 WDA 2024

Appeal from the Order Entered October 9, 2024
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Orphans' Court at No(s): CP-02-AP-0000049-2024

IN THE INTEREST OF: D.R.D., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
APPEAL OF: T.W., MOTHER :
:
:
:
: No. 1324 WDA 2024

Appeal from the Order Entered October 9, 2024
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Orphans' Court at No(s): CP-02-AP-0000050-2024

BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J.E., LANE, J., and BENDER, P.J.E.

MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, P.J.E.: FILED: FEBRUARY 26, 2025

T.W. (“Mother”) appeals from the orders entered in the Allegheny

County Court of Common Pleas (“orphans’ court”) terminating Mother’s

parental rights to her minor children, N.B. and D.R.D. (collectively “the
J-S06001-25

Children”).1 After our thorough review, we affirm on the basis of the orphans’

court’s well-reasoned opinion.

We take the following factual background and procedural history from

the orphans’ court’s November 22, 2024, opinion.

Mother’s older Child, N.B., was born [in] October [] 2020,
and her younger Child, D.R.D., was born [in] January [] 2023.
See N.T. Termination Hearing, 10/7/24, at 48. Alleged father of
N.B. was an individual that is deceased. Alleged father of D.R.D.
was unknown. See id. at 49. CYF filed Petitions to Involuntarily
Terminate the Parental Rights of Mother and the Unknown Fathers
on June [11], 2024. See id.

The family first came to the attention of Allegheny County
CYF in 2021. CYF received a referral for general protective services
that closed out on January 27, 2023. Four days later, on January
31, 2023, CYF received another referral that Mother [recently] had
given birth to her youngest Child, D.R.D., and there were concerns
for substance abuse. See id. at 50. Mother and her newborn Child
tested positive for cocaine, marijuana, fentanyl, and methadone
(prescribed). See id. at 50; CYF Exhibit 2—Combined Court
Orders, at Order of Adjudication and Disposition, 3/1/23, at 2.

CYF obtained an emergency custody order for both
[C]hildren on February 1 and February 2, 2023, respectively,
because of the substance abuse concerns. See N.T. Termination
Hearing, 10/7/24, at 50. Upon removal, the older child was placed
into a non-relative foster home. Mother’s newborn child was
placed into the home of an alleged paternal grandmother. After a
shelter hearing, where it was ordered that both Children remain
in care, the court scheduled a dependency adjudication hearing.
At the Shelter Hearing, the court’s findings reflect that “Mother
acknowledges being on methadone and reported that due to her
being pregnant she was micro-dosing as she was getting ill.
Mother admitted to heroin use throughout the pregnancy while
being the sole caregiver for [Child]. Mother reported using in the
____________________________________________

1 The order also terminated the parental rights of D.R.B.’s putative father

and N.B.’s now deceased father. The termination of the fathers’ parental
rights has not been challenged.

-2-
J-S06001-25

bathroom with [Child] present in the living room. Mother per
admittance attended one prenatal appointment.” CYF Exhibit 2—
Combined Court Orders, at Shelter Care Order, 2/3/23, at 1.

The Children were adjudicated dependent on March 1, 2023.
See N.T. Hearing, 10/7/24, at 51. Mother was directed to
complete a drug and alcohol evaluation through [Pennsylvania
Organization for Women in Early Recovery (“POWER”)] and
comply with recommendations, complete random urine screens,
attend supervised visits with the Children, attend the Children’s
medical appointments, and address any of her own mental health
needs. See id. at 53-54; CYF Exhibit 2—Combined Court Orders,
at Shelter Care Order, 2/3/23, at 3; see id. at Order of
Adjudication and Disposition-Amended, 3/1/23, at 2-3. Mother did
not attend the adjudication hearing, despite receiving notice, but
was represented by counsel. The court appointed the foster
parents as secondary educational and medical decision makers on
that same date.

The first permanency review hearing was on June 20, 2023
and the court found that Mother had made minimal progress
towards alleviating the circumstances which necessitated
removal. See CYF Exhibit 2—Combined Court Orders, at
Permanency Review Order, 6/20/23, at 1-2. The court made a
number of findings of fact with respect to Mother, which reflected
her going in and out of treatment, not availing herself of drug and
alcohol evaluations, not appearing for random urine screens, not
having stable housing, her phone number changing multiple
times, the agency’s effort to reach her by email, and that Mother
had attended four out of thirteen possible supervised visits during
this time period. See id. at 3. The younger Child had been moved
to the foster home of the older Child, and the court ordered that
both [C]hildren remain in placement. Mother was to either
immediately start treatment and participate in random urine
screens, or she needed to complete a drug and alcohol evaluation
and follow recommendations. See id. at 3. The court also ordered
Mother to continue to participate in random screens at the
Allegheny County Health Department, continue contact with CYF,
receive transportation assistance and in-home services, and
attend supervise[d] visits with her Children. See id.

The permanency review hearing, scheduled for September
12, 2023, was continued to November 7, 2023, due to the CYF
caseworker and caseworker supervisor’s unavailability. At the

-3-
J-S06001-25

second permanency review hearing, Mother did not attend in
person, and the court again found that Mother made minimal
progress towards alleviating the circumstance which necessitated
the removal. The Children remained together in foster care, and
were receiving appropriate developmental therapies. The court
found that Mother had only attended eleven out of twenty-three
possible visits during this review period and had failed to provide
confirmation for visits, such that there were occasions when the
Children were transported to her home and Mother was not
present. The court also found that Mother was not appearing for
her random urine screens and had agreed to complete a drug and
alcohol evaluation at POWER evaluation but they had not been
able to make contact with Mother. See id. at Permanency Review
Order, 11/7/23, at 1-3.

The third permanency review hearing occurred on February
20, 2024. At this hearing, the court found that maternal
grandmother, who had visited twice and maintained Facetime
contact with the Children, moved back to Pennsylvania from
Florida to be assessed for placement. The order reflects that
Mother made minimal progress towards alleviating the
circumstances which necessitated placement. See id. at
Permanency Review Order, 2/23/24, 1. Specifically, the court
found that Mother had attended zero out of eleven random urine
screens this review period. Mother was reported as being back at
Gateway inpatient drug and alcohol treatment center and due for
discharge later that month, where she was to engage in a step-
down in an intensive outpatient treatment at Jade Wellness. The
court noted in the order that Mother had pending criminal matters,
did not have her own housing, and prior to going inpatient, had
only supervised visits with her Children. See id. at 3-4.

The court held a de novo review hearing on March 6, 2024
as to the issue of placing the [C]hildren into the care of their
maternal grandmother. See id. at Permanency Review Order,
3/6/24, at 2. The court indicated that maternal grandmother was
to receive two overnight visits each week with the Children, could
visit with the Children when Mother was visiting, and could serve
as a caregiver to the foster parents during any time they needed,
as agreed to between the parties. See id. at 2-3.

Through counsel, Mother motioned the court for
unsupervised visits with the Children, and the court gave

-4-
J-S06001-25

permission to move to up to four hours of unsupervised time with
the Children on April 4, 2024.

However, by the fourth permanency review hearing on April
24, 2024, the court again found that Mother made minimal
progress towards alleviating the circumstances which necessitated
the placement of the Children. See id. at Permanency Review
Order, 4/24/24, at 1. Mother had attended five random urine
screens at the Allegheny County Health Department, was
attending some treatment, and residing with her boyfriend in his
mother’s home. See id. at 2. The court gave permission for the
[C]hildren to be placed with their maternal grandmother once all
child care and developmental services for the Children were in
place at the grandmother’s residence. See id. at 3. Placement
with the maternal grandmother was ratified by the court on June
7, 2024.

Allegheny County CYF filed petitions to terminate the
parental rights of Mother and the unnamed fathers on June 11,
2024. See N.T. Hearing, 10/7/24, at 59.

The fifth permanency review occurred on June 26, 2024,
and at this hearing, the maternal grandmother was appointed as
secondary education and medical decision maker for the Children.
Mother did not attend this permanency review hearing and the
court found that Mother had made minimal progress towards
alleviating the circumstances which necessitated the original
placement. See CYF Exhibit 2—Combined Court Orders, at
Permanency Review Order, 6/26/24, at 1. The court also found
that Mother reported being involved in substance abuse treatment
but that CYF was unable to obtain updates. Additionally, the order
reflected concerns about Mother’s sobriety, noting: “On May 6,
2024, the [Allegheny County Health Department (“ACHD”]
reported that [M]other was found to have a device strapped to her
leg with urine. She indicated to the caseworker that she relapsed
on marijuana.” Id. at 2. Mother stopped working with in-home
services, had been unwilling to address her housing needs, and
her engagement with CYF had decreased this reporting period.
Mother’s visitation returned to supervised, and the [c]ourt
scheduled a goal change and contested termination hearing for
October 7, 2024. See id. at 2-3.

At the time of the contested termination proceeding on
October 7, 2024, the Children had been in care for twenty months

-5-
J-S06001-25

and were residing in relative foster care with their maternal
grandmother. Mother's visitation remained supervised.

Orphans’ Court Opinion, 11/22/24, at 2-8 (some record citation formatting

and some record citations provided, footnotes, some record citations, and

some quotation marks omitted).

On October 9, 2024, the orphans’ court entered an order terminating

Mother’s parental rights to the Children pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. §

2511(a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(8), and (b). Mother timely appealed and filed a

contemporaneous statement of errors. See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a)(2)(i).

Mother raises three issues for our review:

1. Did the trial court abuse its discretion and/or err as a matter
of law in granting the petition to involuntarily terminate Mother’s
parental rights pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. §2511(a)(2), (5), and (8)?

2. Did the trial court abuse its discretion and/or err as a matter
of law in concluding that CYF met its burden of proving by clear
and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental
rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child
pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. §2511(b)?

3. Did Mother waive her right to challenge the trial court’s
decision to terminate her parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S.
§2511(a)(2), (5), (8), and (b)?

Appellant’s Brief, at 6 (suggested answers omitted).

Based upon our independent review of the record and the briefs of the

parties, we affirm on the basis of the thorough and well-reasoned November

22, 2024, opinion of the Honorable Judge Jennifer S. McCrady. Judge McCrady

provided a detailed history of this case and the applicable law, before then

finding CYF presented clear and convincing evidence to support the

-6-
J-S06001-25

termination of Mother’s parental rights pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(2),

(5), (8) and (b). We rely on the court’s findings as to section 2511(a)(2), (b).

The Orphans’ Court Opinion, at pages 12-21 and 26-30, found that CYF

established Mother’s “repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect, or

refusal” “caused these Children to be without essential parental care control,

or subsistence necessary for their physical or mental well-being, and the

conditions and causes of Mother's incapacity, abuse neglect, or refusal would

not be remedied” because Mother failed to comply with her permanency plan

where:

1. Mother failed to remain in regular contact with CYF;

2. Mother only appeared at 7 of 56 random drug screens despite CYF

providing bus passes and gas assistance;

3. CYF was unable to verify any successful drug treatment by Mother

despite her random participation in some inpatient treatment;

4. Mother’s failure to provide CYF with any documentation or releases

related to her mental health treatment;

5. Mother’s lack of consistent work or any stable housing;

6. Mother’s inconsistent visitation with the Children, which primarily

remained supervised;

7. Mother’s repeated criminal charges;

8. Mother’s failure to provide “any credible evidence or testimony to

contradict the evidence and testimony in support of [the] court’s

conclusion;” and

-7-
J-S06001-25

9. despite Mother having some emotional bond with the Children, credible

evidence and testimony that “any potential detriment to the Children

from terminating Mother’s rights would be mitigated by the loving and

secure relationship the Children and maternal grandmother have

established” and that “termination would best meet the developmental,

physical and emotional needs of the Children” pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A.

§ 9511(b)).

See Orphans’ Court Opinion, 11/22/24, at 12-21, 26-30.

Accordingly, we affirm the orphans’ court’s order involuntarily

terminating Mother’s parental rights on the basis of the orphans’ court’s

comprehensive opinion.

Order affirmed.

DATE: 2/26/2025

-8-
Circulated 02/18/2025 01:26 PM
1-0PINION
Circulated 02/18/2025 01:26 PM
I - OPINION

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY,
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA
ORPHANS COURT DIVISION
ORPHANS COURT DIVISION

IN THE INTEREST OF: : CHILDREN'S FAST
INN.B.
THEand
INTEREST OF: children.
D.R.D., minor :TRACK
CHILDREN'S FAST
N.B. and D.R.D., minor children. APPEAL
TRACK
APPEAL OF: APPEAL
APPEAL OF:
T.W., Mother.
T.W., Mother. No. CP-02-AP-49-2024
No. CP-02-AP-50-2024
No. CP-02-A.P-49-2024
No. CP-02-AP-50-2024
1303 WDA 2024
1303 WDA 2024
•pW '• 22024
ClVIIfrFMILY •q£G••nS
{ENY COUN V' PA

OPINION
OPINION.
Judge McCrady November 19, 2024
Judge McCrady
November 19, 2024
Following a one-day hearing on October 7, 2024, where Mother participated
Following aone-day hearing on October 7, 2024, where Mother participated
remotely by telephone' and was represented by counsel, this court issued an order
remotely by telephone, and was represented by counsel, this court issued an order
granting the Petition of the Allegheny County Children, Youth and Families
granting the Petition of the Allegheny County Children, Youth and Families
("CYF") for the involuntarily termination the parental rights of Appellant T.W.
("CYF") for the involuntarily termination the parental rights of Appellant T. W.
("Mother") to the minor children, N.B. and D.R.D. ("Child" or "Children"),
("Mother") to the minor children, N.B. and D.R.D. "
(Child or "Children"),
pursuant to 23 Pa.CS. §2511 (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(8), and (b). The Children were
pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511 (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(g), and (b). The Children were
Prior to going on the record, Mother's counsel requested that her client be
1Prior to going to
permitted onparticipate
the record, inMother's counselvia
the proceeding requested thatand
telephone herthis
client be granted that
court
permitted to,participatein
request. Mother was the proceeding viathroughout
on speakerphone telephone the
and duration
this court
ofgranted that
the termination
request. Mother was on speakerphone throughout the duration of the termination
proceeding.
proceeding.
1
1
the · timely
l 2 Moter appeals' this order, and
represented by court appointed legal counsel.- un
represented by court appointed legal counsel. 2 Mother timely appeals this order, and
for the reasons set forth below, the order involuntarily terminating her parental rights
for the reasons set forth below, the order involuntarily terminating her parental rights
should be affirmed. 3
should be afhrmed. 3

Relevant Factual and Procedural History
Relevant. Factual and Procedural History

Mother's older Child, N.B., was born on October , 2020, and her younger
Mother's older Child, N.B., was born on October #, 2020, and her younger
Child, D.R.D., was born on January , 2023. TT. at 49.5 Alleged father of N.B.
Child, D.R.D., was born on January W, 2023. TT. at 49. 4 Alleged father of N.B.
was an individual that is deceased. Alleged father of D.R.D. was unknown. Id.
was an individual that is deceased. Alleged father of D.R.D. was unknown. Id
CYF filed Petitions to Involuntarily Terminatethe Parental Rights of Mother and
CYF filed Petitions to Involuntarily Terminate° the Parental Rights of Mother and
the Unknown Fathers on June 22, 2024. Id.
the Unknown Fathers on June 22, 2024. Id

The family first came to the attention of Allegheny County CYF in 2021. Id.
The family first came to the attention of Allegheny County CYF in 2021. Id
CYF received a referral for general protective services that closed out on January
CYF received areferral for general protective services that closed out on January
27, 2023. Id. 4weir, on January , 2023, CYF received another referral
27, 2023. Id ,on January1W, 2023, CYF received another referral
that Mother had given birth to her youngest Child, D.R.D., and there were
that Mother had given birth to her youngest Child, D.R.D., and there were
concerns for substance abuse. Id. at 50. Mother and her newborn Child tested
concerns for substance abuse. Id at 50. Mother and her newborn Child tested

2 This court conducted an a conflict analysis and entered an order appointing legal
2This court for
counsel conducted an aconflict
the termination analysisprior
proceeding and to
entered an orderdate.
the contested appointing legal
counsel for the termination proceeding prior to the contested date.
3CYF filed petitions to involuntarily terminate the rights of Mother and unknown
3 CYF filed Upon
fathers. petitions
the toconclusion
involuntarily terminateon
of testimony theOctober
rights of
7, Mother andcourt
2024, this unknown
fathers. Upon the
terminated theconclusion of testimony
parental rights of Motheronbased
October 7, the
upon 2024, this court addressed
subsections
terminated the parental
herein and terminated rights
the of Motherrights
parental basedofupon the subsections
unknown addressed
fathers pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.
herein and (a)(1),
$2511 terminated
(a)2),the(a)(5),
parental rights
(a)(8), andof unknown
(b). fathers has
No individual pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.
come forward to claim
§2511paternity
(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(g), and (b). No individual has
to either child. Transcript of Testimony ("TT.") at 70.come forward to claim
paternity to either child. Transcript of Testimony ("TT. ") at 70
4 Transcript of Testimony for the one day evidentiary hearing that occurred in this
4Transcript ofOctober
matter on Testimony for thehereinafter
7, 2024 one day evidentiary
"T.T.. hearing that occurred in this
matter on October 7, 2024 hereinafter "T.T.".
2
2
positive for "cocaine, marijuana, fentanyl, and methadone (prescribed)." CYF
positive for. " cocaine, marijuana, fentanyl, and methadone (prescribed)." CYF
Exhibit 2- Combined Court Orders.
Exhibit 2- Combined Court Orders.

CYF obtained an emergency custody order for both children on February I
CYF obtained an emergency custody order for both children on February I
and February 2, 2023, respectively, because of the substance abuse concerns. T.T.
and February 2, 2023, respectively, because of the substance abuse concerns. T.T.
at 50; see also CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined Court Orders. Upon removal, the older
at 50; see also CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined Court Orders. Upon removal, the older
child was placed into a non-relative foster home. Id. at 50. Mother's newborn
child was placed into anon-relative foster home. Al at 50. Mother's newborn
child was placed into the home of an alleged paternal grandmother. Id. After a
child was placed into the home of an alleged paternal grandmother. Id After a
shelter hearing, where it was ordered that both Children remain in care, the court
shelter hearing, where it was ordered that both Children remain in care, the court
scheduled a dependency adjudication hearing. CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined Court
scheduled adependency adjudication hearing. CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined Court
Orders. At the Shelter Hearing, the court's findings reflect that "Mother
Orders. At the Shelter Hearing, the court's findings reflect that "Mother
acknowledges being on methadone and reported that due to her being pregnant she
acknowledges being on methadone and reported that due to her being pregnant she
was micro-dosing as she was getting ill. Mother admitted to heroin use throughout
was micro- dosing as she was getting i11. Mother admitted to heroin use throughout
the pregnancy while being the sole caregiver for [Child]. Mother reported using in
the pregnancy while being the sole caregiver for [Child]. Mother reported using in
the bathroom room with [Child] present in the living room. Mother per admittance
the bathroom room with [ Child] present in the living room. Mother per admittance
attended one prenatal appointment." Id
attended one prenatal appointment." Id

The Children were adjudicated dependent on March 1, 2023. Id. at 51.
The Children- were adjudicated dependent on March 1, 2023. Id. at 51.
Mother was directed to complete a drug and alcohol evaluation through POWERS
Mother was directed to complete adrug and alcohol evaluation through POWERS
and comply with recommendations, complete random urine screens, attend
and comply with recommendations, complete random urine screens, attend

S POWER stands for Pennsylvania Organization for Women in Early Recovery.
'POWER stands
This local for Pennsylvania
organization providesOrganization for Women
gender inclusive in Early
drug and Recovery.
alcohol assessments,
This recommendations
local organization and
provides gender inclusive drug and alcohol assessments,
referrals for treatment, peer mentorship and support along
recommendations and, referrals
the continuum of care. for treatment, peer mentorship and support along
the continuum of care.
3
3
supervised visits with the Children, attend the Children's medical appointments%,
supervised visits with the Children, attend the Children's medical appointments,
and address any of her own mental health needs. Id. at 5l; see also CYF Exhibit 2
and address any of her own mental health needs. Id. at 5l; see also CYF Exhibit 2
- Combined Court Orders. Mother did not attend the adjudication hearing, despite
Combined Court Orders. Mother did not attend the adjudication hearing, despite
receiving notice, but was represented by counsel. CYF Exhibit 2- Combined
receiving notice, but was represented by counsel. CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined
Court Orders. The court appointed the foster parents as secondary educational and
Court Orders. The court appointed the foster parents as secondary educational and
medical decision makers on that same date. Id.
medical decision makers on that same date. Id

The first permanency review hearing was on June 20, 2023 and the court
The first permanency review hearing was on June 20 ;2023 and the court
found that Mother had made minimal progress towards alleviating the
found that Mother had made minimal progress towards alleviating the
circumstances which necessitated removal. Id. The court made a number of
circumstances which necessitated removal. Id. The court made anumber of
findings of fact with respect to Mother, which reflected her going in and out of
findings of fact with respect to Mother, which reflected her going in and out of
treatment, not availing herself of drug and alcohol evaluations, not appearing for
treatment;not availing herself of drug and alcohol evaluations, not appearing for
random urine screens, not having stable housing, her phone number changing
random urine screens, not having stable housing, her phone number changing
multiple times, the agency's effort to reach her by email, and that Mother had
multiple times, the agency's effort to reach her'by email, and that Mother had
attended four out of thirteen possible supervised visits during this time period. Id.
attended four out of thirteen possible supervised visits during this time period. Id
The younger Child had been moved to the foster home of the older Child, and the
The younger Child had been moved to the foster home of the older Child, and the'
court ordered that bothchildren remain in placement. Id. Mother was to either
court ordered that both children remain in placement. Id. Mother was to either
immediately start treatment and participate in random urine screens, or she needed
immediately start treatment and participate in random urine screens, or she needed
to complete a drug and alcohol evaluation and follow recommendations. id. The
to complete adrug and alcohol evaluation and follow recommendations. Id. The
court also ordered Mother to continue to participate in random screens at the
court also ordered Mother to continue-lo, participate in random screens at the
Allegheny County Health Department, continue contact with CYF, receive
Allegheny County Health Department, continue contact with CYF, receive

4
4
:. ~. • d ttend supervise visits with her
assistance and in-home services, ant a
transportation
transportation assistance and in -
home services, and attend supervise visits with her

Children.Id.
Children. Id.

The permanency review hearing, scheduled for September 12, 2023, was
The pennaneney review hearing, scheduled for September 12, 2023, was
continued to November 7, 2023, due to the CYF caseworker and caseworker
continued to November 7, 2023, due to the CYF caseworker and caseworker
supervisor's unavailability. Id. At the second permanency review hearing, Mother
supervisor's unavailability. Id. At the second permanency review hearing, Mother
did not attend in person, and the court again found that Mother made minimal
did not attend in person, and the court again found that Mother made minimal
progress towards alleviating the circumstance which necessitated the removal. Id
progress towards alleviating the circumstance which necessitated the removal. Icl.
The Children remained together in foster care, and were receiving appropriate
The Children remained together in foster care, and were receiving appropriate.
developmental therapies. Id. The court found that Mother had only attended
developmental. therapies : Id The.court found that Mother had only attended
eleven out of twenty-three possible visits during this review period and had failed
eleven out of twenty-three possible visits during this review period and had failed
to provide confirmation for visits, such that there were occasions when the
to provide confirmation for visits, such that there were occasions when the
Children were transported to her home and Mother was not present. id. The court.
Children were transported to her home and Mother was not present. Id. The court
also found that Mother was not appearing for her random urine screens and had
also found that Mother was not appearing for her random urine screens and had
agreed to complete a drug and alcohol evaluation at POWER evaluation but they
agreed to complete adrug and alcohol evaluation at POWER evaluation but they
had not been able to make contact with Mother. Id.
had not been able to make contact with Mother. Id

The third permanency review hearing occurred on February 20, 2024. At
The third permanency review hearing occurred on February 20, 2024. At
this hearing, the court found that maternal grandmother, who had visited twice and
this hearing, the court found that maternal grandmother, who had visited twice and
maintained Facetime contact with the Children, moved back to Pennsylvania from
maintained Facetime contact with the Children, moved back to Pennsylvania from
Florida to be assessed for placement. Id. The order reflects that Mother made
Florida to be assessed for placement. Id The order reflects that Mother made
minimal progress towards alleviating the circumstances which necessitated
minimal progress towards alleviating the circumstances which necessitated

5
5
the court found that Mother had attended zero out of
placement. Id. Spec\f. ica·lly,
placement. Id. Specifically, the court found that Mother had attended zero out of
eleven random urine screens this review period. Id. Mother was reported as being
eleven random urine screens this review period. Id. Mother was reported as being
back at Gateway inpatient drug and alcohol treatment center and due for discharge
back at Gateway inpatient drug and alcohol treatment center and due for discharge
later that month, where she was to engage in a step-down in an intensive outpatient
later that month, where she was to engage in astep-down in an intensive outpatient
treatment at Jade Wellness. Id The court noted in the order that Mother had
treatment at Jade Wellness. Id. The court noted in the order that Mother had
pending criminal matters, did not have her own housing, and prior to going
pending criminal matters, did not have her own housing, and prior to going
inpatient, had only supervised visits with her Children. Id.
inpatient, had only supervised visits with her Children. Id.
The court held a de novo review hearing on March 6, 2024 as to the issue of
The court held ade novo review hearing on March (, 2024 as to the issue of
placing the children into the care of their maternal grandmother. Id. The court
placing the children into the care of their maternal grandmother. Id. The court
indicated that maternal grandmother was to receive two overnight visits each week
indicated that maternal grandmother was to receive two overnight visits each week
with the Children, could visit with the Children when Mother was visiting, and
with the Children, could visit with the Children when Mother was visiting, and
could serve as a caregiver to the foster parents during any time they needed, as
could serve as acaregiver to the foster parents during any time they needed, as
agreed to between the parties. Id.
agreed to between the parties. Id.

Through counsel, Mother motioned the court for unsupervised visits with the
Through counsel, Mother motioned the court for unsupervised visits with the
Children, and the court gave permission to move to up to four hours of
Children, and the court gave permission to "love to up to four hour of
unsupervised time with the Children on April 4, 2024. Id.
unsupervised time with the Children on April 4, 2024. Id.

However, by the fourth permanency review hearing on April 24, 2024, the
However, by the fourth permanency review hearing on April 24, 2024, the
court again found that Mother made minimal progress towards alleviating the
court again found that Mother made minimal progress towards alleviating the
circumstances which necessitated the placement of the Children. Id. Mother had
circumstances which necessitated the placement of the Children. ICI Mother had
attended five random urine screens at the Allegheny County Health Department,
attended five random urine screens at the Allegheny County Health Department,

6
6
idi wt
was attending some treatment, and residing
ith hher boyfriend
• in his mother's
was attending some treatment, and residing with her boyfriend in his mother's

home. Id. The court gave permission for the children to be placed with their
home. Id. The court gave permission for the children to be placed with their
maternal grandmother once all child care and developmental services for the
maternal grandmother once all child care and developmental services for the
Children were in place at the grandmother's residence. Id. Placement with the
Children were in place at the grandmother's residence. Id. Placement with the
maternal grandmother was ratified by the court on June 7, 2024. Id
maternal grandmother was ratified by the court on June 7, 2024. Id

Allegheny County CYF filed petitions to terminate the parental rights of
Allegheny County CYF filed petitions to terminate the parental.rights of
Mother and the unnamed fathers on June 11, 2024. T.T. at 59
Mother and the unnamed fathers on June 11, 2024. T.T. at 59

The fifth permanency review occurred on June 26, 2024, and at this hearing,
The fifth permanency review occurred on June 26, 2024, and at this hearing,
the maternal grandmother was appointed as secondary education and medical
the maternal grandmother was appointed as secondary education and medical
decision maker for the Children. CYF Exhibit 2- Combined Conrt Orders.
decision maker for the Children. CYF Exhibit 2 - Combined Court Orders.
Mother did not attend this permanency review hearing and the court found that
Mother did not attend this permanency review hearing and the cour-tfound that
Mother had made minimal progress towards alleviating the circumstances which
Mother had made minimal progress towards alleviating the circumstances which
necessitated the original placement. Id. The court also found that Mother reported
necessitated the original placement. Id The court also found that Mother reported
being involved in substance abuse treatment but that CYF was unable to obtain
being involved in substance abuse treatment but that CYF was unable to obtain
updates. Id. Additionally, the order reflected concerns about Mother's sobriety,
updates. Al Additionally, the order reflected concerns about Mother's sobriety,
noting: "On May 6, 2024, the ACHD reported that mother was found to have a
noting; "On May 6, 2024, the ACRD reported that mother was found to have a
device strapped to her leg with urine. She indicated to the caseworker that she
device'strapped to her leg with urine. She indicated to the caseworker that she
relapsed on marijuana." Id. Mother stopped working with in-home services, had
relapsed on marijuana." Id. Mother stopped working with in- home services, had
been unwilling to address her housing needs, and her engagement with CYF had
been unwilling to address her housing needs, and her engagement with CYF had
decreased this reporting period. Id. Mother's visitation returned to supervised, and
decreased this reporting period. Id Mother's visitation returned to supervised, and

7
7
theCourt
the Courtscheduled
scheduleda goalchange
agoal changeand
andcontested
contestedtermination
tenninationhearing forOctober
hearingfor October'

7,7,2024.
2024. Id.
Id.

Atthe
At the time
timeof
ofthe
thecontested
contestedtennination
terminationproceeding on October
proceedingon October7,7,2024, the
2024,the

Childrenhad
Children hadbeen
been inin care
care for
fortwenty
twentymonths
monthsand
andwere
wereresiding
residinginin relative
relativefoster
foster

care with
care with their
theirmaternal
maternal grandmother.
grandmother. Mother's
Mother'svisitation
visitation remained
remained supervised.
supervised.

Standards
Standards

The standards
The standards for
forreview
review inin termination
termination cases
cases are
are well
well established.
established. Our
Our

appellate courts
appellate courts will accept the
will accept the finding
finding of
offacts
facts and
and credibility determinations of
credibility determinations of

the trial
the trialcourt
court ififthey
they are
are supported
supported by the record,
by the record, even
even if.the
if the record
record could
could also
also

support a
support a different
different result.
result. Adoption
Adoption of
ofG.J.P., 114 A.3d
C.J.P, 114 A.3d 1046,
1046, 1049
1049(Pa.
(Pa. Super.
Super.

20 15); see
2015); see also
also In
In re
re R.JS., 90 I A.2d
R.J.S., 901 A.2d 502,
502, 506-507
506-507(Pa.
(Pa. Super. An abuse
2006). An
Super. 2006). abuse of
of

discretion
discretion isis defined
defined as
as manifest
manifest unreasonableness,
unreasonableness, partiality,
partiality, prejudice
prejudice or
or ill-will
ill-will

and not
and not merely a circumstance
merely a circumstance in
in which
which the record would
the record would or
or could
could support a
support a

different result.
different id. at
result. Id, at 1049.
1049. Moreover,
Moreover, the
the appellate court has
appellate court has emphasized
emphasized the
the

deference afforded
deference: afforded to
to trial
trial courts
courts because
because of
of their
their first-hand
first-hand observations
observations of
of the
the

parties
parties spanning
spanning multiple
multiple hearings.
hearings. In
In re
re T.S.M., 71 A.3d
TS.M., 71 A.3d 251,
251, 267
267 ((Pa. 2013).
Pa. 2013).

our Pennsylvania
Recently, our Supreme Court
Pennsylvania Supreme Court has
has further
further expounded
expounded on
on this
this standard,
standard,

stating:
stating:

Because trial
Because trial courts are on the front
front lines
lines assessing
assessing the
the credibility
credibility of
of
witnesses and weighing competing and and often evidence, it
often challenging evidence,
is paramount
paramount that, in reviewing trial
trial courts'
courts' decisions
decisions in
in this
this area,
area,
observations as
appellate courts defer to the trial courts' first-hand observations

8
8
they
theyrelate
relate toto factual
factual determinations,
determinations. InIn this
this regard,
regard, wewe reiterate
reiterate that
that
appellate courts must review such decisions for an abuse of discretion
appellate courts must review such decisions for an abuse of discretion
or
or error
error oror law,
law, and
and appellate
appellate courts
courts may
may reverse
reverse trial
trial courts
courts only
only
when
when thatthat discretion
discretion hashas been
been breached
breached or or when
when the
the law
law hashas been
been
misapplied.
misapplied. In In other
other words,
words, the
the court
court should
should review
review the the certified
certified
record to decide whether it supports the trial court's order, regardless
record to decide whether it supports the trial court's order, regardless
of
ofwhether
whether thethe appellate
appellate court
court agrees
agrees with
with the
the result
resultthat
thatthethe trial
trialcourt
court
reached.
reached.

In the
In theInterest
Interestof
ofS.K.L.R.,
S.K.L.R., 256 A. 3d
256A. 3d atat 1129
1129(2021).
(2021) To
To affirm,
affirm, the
the appellate
appellate court
court

must
must only
only agree
agreethat
that grounds
grounds exist
exist for
for termination
termination under
underany
any of
ofsubsection
subsection of
ofthe
the

applicable.law.
applicable.law. See C.J.P atat 114
See C.J.P, 114A.3d
A.3d atat 1050.
1050. Grounds
Grounds for
fortermination
termination include,
include,

inter alia,
inter alia, the
the following subsections:
following subsections:

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

(5)
(5) The
The child
child has
has been
been removed'from
removed from the the care
care of
ofthe
the parent
parent by by the
the Court
Court
or under avoluntary agreement with an agency for aperiod of at least
or under a voluntary agreement with an agency for a period of at least
six
six months,
months, the
the conditions
conditions which
which led
led to
to the
the removal
removal or or placement
placement of ofthe
the
child
child continue
continue toto exist,'
exist, the
the parent
parent cannot
cannot or will not
or will not remedy
remedy those
those
conditions within areasonable period of time, the services or assistance
conditions within a reasonable period of time, the services or assistance
reasonably
reasonably available
available to to the
the parent
parent are are not
not likely
likely toto remedy
remedy the the
conditions
conditions which
which ledled to
to the
the removal
removal or or placement
placement of of the
the child
child within
within a.a
reasonable period of time and termination of the parental rights would
reasonable period of time and termination of the parental rights would
best
best serve
serve the
the needs
needs and
and welfare
welfare ofof the
the child.
child. [...]
[...J

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

9
9
2323Pa.C.S.
Pa.C.S.§2511 (a)2),
$2511(a)(2), and(a)(8).
(a)(5),and
,(a)(5); Theburden
(a)(8).The burdenisisupon thepetitioner
uponthe petitionertotoprove
prove

theasserted,
the assertedgrounds
groundsfor
forseeking terminationofofparental
seekingteiiiiination parentalrights
rightsby clearand
byclear and

convincing evidence. InInrereR.N.J.,
convincingevidence. R.N.J.,985
985A.2d
A.2d273,
273,276
276(Pa.
(Pa.Super. 2009). InInaa
Super.2009).

terminationofofparental
termination rightsproceeding,
parentalrights proceeding,the
thebest
bestinterests
interestsofofthe
thechild
childisisnot
notthe
the

initialororonly
initial onlyconsideration,
consideration,asasthe
thecourt
courtmust
mustfirst
firstfind
findthat
thatthe
thestatutory
statutorygrounds for
groundsfor

terminationofofparental
termination parentalrights havebeen
rightshave beenmet. Kimock
met. Kimock Jones,474 7A.3d
vJones, A.3d850
850(Pa.
(Pa.

Whengrounds
2012). When
Super.2012).
Super. havebeen
groundshave beenshown
shownby clearand
byclear andconvincing evidence,the
convincingevidence, the

courtmust
court mustthen
thenconsider
considerwhether
whetherthe
thetermination
terminationwould
wouldmeet
meetthe
theneeds
needsand
andwelfare
welfare

pursuanttoto§ $2511
pursuant 2511(b), whichstates:
(b ),which states:

Other considerations.
(b) Other
(b) considerations. —- The The Court
Court inin terminating
terminating thethe rights
rights ofof aa
shall give
parent shall
parent give primary considerationtotothe
primaryconsideration the developmental,
developmental, physical
physical
and emotional needs and welfare of the child.
and emotional needs and welfare of the child. The rights of a The rights of a parent
parent
shallnot
shall notbebeterminated
terminatedsolely
solelyon onthe
thebasis
basisofofenvironmental
environmentalfactorsfactors such
such
as inadequate
as housing,furnishings;
inadequatehousing, income, clothing
furnishings,income, andmedical
clothingand medicalcarecareifif
found toto be
found be beyond
beyond the the control
control ofof the
the parent. With respect
parent. With respect toto any
any
petition filed pursuant to subsection (a)1), (6), or (8),
petition filed pursuant to subsection (a)(1), (6), or (8), the Court shall the Court shall
not consider
not consider any efforts by
any efforts the parent
by the parent toto remedy
remedy the the conditions
conditions
described therein which are first initiated
described therein which are first initiated subsequent to t he
subsequent to the giving giving ofof
notice of
notice ofthe
the filing ofthe
filing of the petitions.
petitions.

23 Pa.C.S.
23 Pa.C.S. §82511(b). This §2511(b)
2511(b). This analysis requires
$2511(b) analysis focus on
requires focus on the
the child,
child, as
as

well as
well as the
the individual
individual and
and unique circumstances of
unique circumstances ofthat
that child's
child's,ease. In re
case. In re KT.,
K.T, 296
296

A3d 1085,
Aid 1105 (
1085,, 1105 (Pa. The court's
2023). The
Pa. 2023). inquiry requires
court's inquiry requires examination
examination of
of

thatare
intangibles that
intangibles are key
key components of a
components of a child"s
child's needs
needs and
and welfare,
welfare, such
such as
as love,
love,

comfort,
comfort, security,
security, and
and stability, as well
stability, as well as
as the
the bond
bond the
the child
child has
has with
with the
the foster
foster

parents
parents orparent. Id. at
or parent. Id. at 11,06;
1106; see
see also Adoption of'MA.B.,
also Adoption of M.A.B., 166
166 A.3d
A.3d 434,
434, 443
443_(Pa
(Pa.

10
10
Super201.7).
Super 2017). Consideration
Considerationof
ofany
anypossible
possibleparental bondsare
parentalbonds areonly butone
onlybut onefactor
factor

amongmany.
among SeeK.K.T;
many. See seealso
T.; see N.A.M.,3333A.A.3d
alsoInInrereN.A.t11., 3d95, 103( Pa.
95, 103 (Pa.Super.
Super.2011).
2011).

Asthe
As thetrial
trialcourt
courtpossesses
possessesthe
thediscretion
discretiontotoweigh thefactors
weighthe factorsof
ofeach
eachindividual
individual

case,the
case, thetrial
trialcourt
courtalso
alsoconsiders
considerswhether
whethertermination
terminationof
ofthe
theparent's
parent'srights would
rightswould

destroyan
destroy anexisting,
existing,necessary, andbeneficial
necessary,and beneficialrelationship. Id.
relationship. Id..

Discussion
Discussion

Motherappeals
Mother the orders
appealsthe terminatingher
ordersterminating herparental
parental rights and inin her
rights and herconcise
concise

statement, alleges:
statement, alleges:

The trial
The trial court
court abused
abused its
its discretion
discretion and/or
and/or erred
erred as as aa matter
matter ofoflaw
law inin
granting the
granting the petition
petition toto involuntarily terminate Mother's
involuntarily terminate Mother's parental
parental
rights pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. §25 1(a)(2) (5) and
rights pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 2511(a)(2) (5) and (8). There was (8). There was not
not
clear and
clear and convincing evidence that
convincing evidence that the
the repeated
repeated and and continued
continued
abuse,
incapacity, abuse, neglect,
incapacity, or refusal of Mother caused
neglect, or refusal of Mother caused the child to the child to be
be
without essential
without essential parental care, control,
parental care, control, or or subsistence
subsistence necessary
necessary for for
theirphysical
their physical oror mental
mental well-being,
well-being, and and that
that the
the conditions
conditions and and causes
causes
of
of any
any incapacity,
incapacity, abuse,
abuse, neglect
neglect or or refusal
refusal cannot
cannot or or will
will not
not be be
remedied by Mother. The conditions which led to the removal of the
remedied by Mother. The conditions which led to the removal of the
child
child either
either nono longer
longer exist
exist oror can
can bebe remedied
remedied withinwithin a a reasonable
reasonable
period
period ofof time
time and
and termination
termination of of parental
parental rights does not
rights does not serve
serve the
the
needs and
needs and welfare
welfare of
ofthe
the child.
child.

The trial
The trial court
court abused
abused itsits discretion
discretion and/or
and/or erred
erred as
as a
a matter
matter of
of law
law inin
concluding that
concluding that CYF
CYF met met itsits burden
burden of of proving
proving by clear and
by clear and
convincing
convincing evidence
evidence that
that termination
termination of of Mother's
Mother's parental
parental rights
rights
would best serve the needs and welfare of the, child
would best serve the needs and welfare of the child pursuant to pursuant to 23
23
Pa.C.S.
Pa.C.S. §$2511(b),
2511(b), when
when the the record
record does
does not
not support
support such
such aa finding.
finding.
Furthermore, CYF
Furthermore, CYF failed
failed toto meet
meet its
its burden under 23
burden under 23 Pa.C.S.
Pa.C.S. §$2511(a)
2511(a)
which should have precluded the trial court from making
which should have precluded the trial court from making a finding a finding
under §§2511
under (b ).
25.11(b).

11
11
See
See Mother's
Mother's Concise
Concise Statement
Statementof
ofErrors
Errors Complained
Complained of
ofon,Appeal
on Appeal filed
filed on
on

October
October 22,
22, 2024
2024 for
for N.B
N.B and
and D.RD. atA
D.R.D. at P-02-49-2024 and
AP-02-49-2024 andAP-02-50-2024.
AP-02-50-2024.

Mother
Mother raises
raises issues
issues on
on appeal
appeal without
without any
any specificity
specificity or
or identification as to
identification as to where
where

in
in the
the record
record there
there was
was an
an error
error and/or
and/or abuse
abuse of
ofdiscretion.
discretion. The
The Concise
Concise Statement
Statement

largely
largely mirrors
mirrors the
the statutory
statutory language;
language, which
which violates
violates the
the Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Rules
Rules of
of

Appellate
Appellate Procedure
Procedure 1925(b)(4)(ii)
1925(b)4)ii) (Requirements;
(Requirements; waiver).
waiver). Appellant
Appellant isis required
required

to
to concisely
concisely identify
identify each
each error
error with
with sufficient
sufficient detail
detail so
so as
as to
to identify
identify the
the issue
issue to
to

be
be raised
raised before
before the
the judge.
judge. Id.
Id. Compliance
Compliance with
with this
this rule
rule allows
al1ows the
the court
court to
to issue
issue

an
an opinion
opinion tailored
tailored to
to the
the specific
specific issue(s) raised on
issue(s) raised on appeal,
appeal, rather
rather than
than undertake
undertake a
a

review of
review of the
the entire
entire record
record in
in an
an attempt
attempt to determine the
to determine the issue(s)
issue(s) on
on appeal.
appeal.

Therefore,
Therefore, this
this court
court believes that due
believes that due to
to the lack of
the lack of overall
overall specificity
specificity in
in the
the

Concise
Concise Statement,
Statement, Mother's
Mother's issues
issues should
should be
be deemed
deemed issues
issues raised
raised for
for the
the first,
first

time;
time; for
for this
this reason,
reason, the
the Mother's
Mother's arguments
arguments should
should be
be waived.
waived. See
See Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania

Rules
Rules of
ofAppellate
Appellate Procedure
Procedure 1.925(b)(4)(vii).
1925(b)4)vii). Notwithstanding,
Notwithstanding, the
the court
court will
will

provide
provide the
the analysis
analysis as
as to
to these
these issues
issues below.
below.

§2511
§2511 (a)(2)
(a)(2)

With respect to 23 Pa. C.S. §$ 2511(a)(2), CYF clearly and convincingly
Pa. C.S.

proved
proved that the repeated and
and continued incapacity, abuse,
abuse; neglect, or refusal of

Mother caused these Children to be without essential
essential parental care control, or

subsistence necessary for their physical or mental well-being, and the conditions

and causes of Mother's incapacity, abuse
abuse neglect, or refusal would not be remedied

12
byMother.
by Mother. The
Therecord
recordisisreplete
repletewith
withevidence
evidencethat
thatthe
theconcerns
concernsthat
thatexisted
existedatatthe
the

timeof
time ofthe
theremoval
removalcontinued
continuedto
toexist, withvery
exist,with limitedchange,
verylimited change,atatthe
thetime
timeofofthe
the

terminationproceeding.
termination proceeding.

TheseChildren
These Childrencame
cameinto
intocare
careshortly afterMother
shortlyafter Mothergave birthtotothe
gavebirth theyounger
younger

Child
Childon
onJanuary
January30,
30,2023,
2023,wherein
whereinboth
bothshe
sheand
andthe
thenewborn
newborntested
testedpositive
positivefor
for

multiplesubstances.
multiple substances. T.T.
T.T. atat50.
50. Mother's
Mother'solder
olderChild,
Child,was
wastwo
twoyears andthree
yearsand three

monthsold
months oldatatthe
thetime
timeof
ofthe
theremoval.
removal. Mother
Mothertestified
testifiedthat
thatshe
sheused
usedwhen
when he
hewas
was

inin another
anotherroorn.
room. Mother
Motheradmitted
admittedtotoone
oneprenatal
prenatal appointment,
appointment, macrodosing her
macroclosingher

methadone because
methadone because she
shewas
was getting sick, and
getting sick:, and using heroin while
using heroin while pregnant. CYF
pregnant. CYF

,Exhibit
.Exhibit22-Combined
- Combined Court
Court Orders.
Orders. Initially,
Initially, the
the Children
Children were
were placed
placed into
into two
two

separate
separate placements.
placements. The
The oldest
oldest was
was placed
placed into
into a
a non-relative
non-relative Three
Three Rivers
Rivers

Adoption
Adoption Council
Council("TRAC")
("TRAC") foster
foster home
home and
and the
the newborn
newborn was
was placed
placed into
into the
the

home
home of
ofan
an alleged
alleged paternal
paternal grandmother,
grandmother, later
later determined
determined by
by paternity
paternity testing
testing to
to

be a
be a non-relative. Id. The
non-relative. Id. The younger Childjoined
younger Child joined his
his older
older sibling in the
sibling in TRAC
the TRAC

foster home
foster home in
in May
May 2023. T.T. atat 50-51.
2023. T.T. 50-51. Both
Both Children
Children were
were ultimately
ultimately placed
placed

with maternal
with maternal grandmother on May
grandmother on 31, 2024
May 31, 2024 after
after she
she relocated
relocated from
from Florida
Florida to
to

serve
serve as
as a
a stable,
stable, permanent
permanent family
family placement
placement for
for the
the Children.
Children. The
The Children
Children have
have

been in
been in the
the home
home of
of their
their grandmother since that
grandmother since that time.
time. Id.
Id. at
at 62;
62; see
see also
also CYF
CYF

Exhibit 22 -- Combined Court
Court Orders; see
see also.
also CYF
CYF Exhibit
Exhibit lI -- Dr.
Dr. O'Hara
O'Hara

Evaluation Report
Evaluation 9/9/24.
Report 9/9/24.

13
At the adjudication hearing, Mother was ordered to address several things,
things,

complete. aadrug and alcohol evaluation through POWER and comply
including: complete comply

with their recommendations, complete random urine screens, attend supervised

visits with the Children, attend the Children's medical appointments,
appointments, and address

any
any of
of her own
own mental health needs. Id. at 5l;
51; see
see also CYF Exhibit 2-Combined
also CYF 2 - Combined

separate` Family
Court Orders. CYF completed four separate Family Service Plans on March 3,

2023,
2023, August 16, 2023,
August 16, 2023, February 20, 2024,
February 20, 2024, and
and. September 1.7, 2024.
September 17, 2024. These
These service
service

plans meetings aimed to create a
plans a roadmap for Mother to address goals and work

1d at 53; see also CYF Exhibit 3-Combined
towards reunification. Id. 3 - Combined Family

Service Plans.
Plans. Mother attended only two of the four
four Family Service Plan

Meetings. Id. In each of these plans, Mother's goals to remain in contact with
Meetings.

CYF, work with in-home services, continue her supervised visits, comply with her

recommended medical assisted treatment,
treatment 6,attend random urine screens, obtain
obtain.

housing, and maintain her mental health medication management, and attend
housing,

treatment for her substance abuse issues at the appropriate
treatment appropriate level of care. Id.

Mother failed to remain in regular contact with CYF from adjudication

through February 2024. Id. at 54.
through

6 At certain times during the pendency of the case, Mother participated in
6At certain times during the pendency of the case, Mother participated in
medically
medically assisted treatment for her opiate
opiate addiction, sometimes referred to in
records,
records, plans
plans or
or court orders
orders as
as "MAP."

14
14
CYF
CYF made
made multiple
multiple referrals
referrals for
for drug
drug and
and alcohol
alcohol assessments
assessments through
through

POWER over
POWER over the
the pendency
pendency of
ofthis
this case.
case. Id.
Id. at
at 55.
55. CYF
CYF made
made referrals
referrals on
on

February
February 1,1, 2023,
2023, May
May 3,
3, 2023,
2023, October
October 23,
23, 2023,
2023, and
and August
August 23,
23, 2023.
2023. Id.
Id. At
At

the
the termination
termination proceeding,
proceeding, the
the POWER
POWER representative
representative testified
testified to
to extensive
extensive

efforts
efforts made
made to
to engage
engage Mother.
Mother. Id. at5-13.
Id. at 5-13.

Mother
Mother was
was ordered
ordered to
to participate
participate in
in random
random urines
urines at
at the
the Allegheny
Allegheny Country
County

Health
Health Department.
Department. Id
Id. at
at 55.
55. CYF
CYF called
called Mother
Mother-in
in for
for fifty-six
fifty-six (56)
(56) screens
screens and
and

Mother
Mother only
only appeared
appeared for
for seven
seven (7)
(7) screens.
screens. Id.
Id. at
at 56.
56. CYF
CYF provided
provided both
both bus
bus

passes
passes and
and gas
gas assistance,
assistance, during
during times
times when
when Mother
Mother identified
identified having
having vehicle
vehicle

transportation,
transportation, to
to attend
attend these
these screens.
screens. Id.
Id. Likewise,
Likewise, a
a representative
representative from
from the
the

Allegheny
Allegheny County
County Health
Health Department
Department testified to Mother's
testified to Mother's screens
screens and
and results.
results. Id.
Id.

at
at 14-19.
14-19.

CYF testified that they
they never received
received any documentation from Mother
Mother that

she
she engaged in drug
engaged in drug and
and alcohol
alcohol treatment,
treatment, either
either in
in the
the form of a
form of a five-point
five-point letter
letter

or
or certificate of program completion. Id. At different times during
of program during the
the dependency

case, Mother
Mother participated in the permanency review hearings by phone because she

said she was inpatient treatment; however, CYF was never able to verify successful

completion of any treatment. Id. at 55.

CYF believed that Mother's mental health medication was provided by her

primary
primary care physician
physician but was never able to verify this information. Id. at 55-56.

15.
15
Moreover, however, CYF did not receive any documentation or releases of

information for treatment related to her mental health. Id.

in-home services provided by
Mother inconsistently worked with the weekly in-home

in-home services closed unsuccessfully in June 2024. Id
CYF, and in-home Icl. at 57.
57..

Id., at 57; sec
Mother's did not establish stable housing. Id. see also CYF Exhibit 2-
2-

Combined Court Orders.

Mother's visitation with the children was inconsistent, and testimony from

the Three Rivers Adoption Council
Council (" TRAC") foster care agency that the Children
("TRAC)

resided in prior to being placed into the home of the maternal grandmother, Denise

Kushik demonstrated the same. Id. at 51; 72-85. Mother's visits were supervised

throughout the dependency case except for aabrief window of'time,
of time, from April 4,

2024 to approximately May 8, 2024, where the court permitted unsupervised

between. Mother and the.
contact between the, Children, until such time as when Mother

disclosed a the court ordered the visits return to supervised. Id. at 61.
a relapse and the

At the time of the termination hearing, Mother's visits were still being supervised

by maternal grandmother. Id.
Id at 62.
6.2.

Mother had pending criminal matters during the dependency case, and at the

time of the termination
termination hearing, Mother still had pending charges from September

2024 for aaretail theft charge.
charge: Id. at 59; see also CYF Exhibit 4-Certified
4 - Certified

Criminal Records.

16
16
Mother participated
Mother participated in
in the
the termination
termination hearing
hearing by
by telephone.
telephone. Id. at
at 3.
3.

Mother testified
Mother testified that she
she had
had been
been inpatient
inpatient for
for drug
drug and
and alcohol treatment three
alcohol treatment three

times during
times during the
the dependency case, stating
dependency case, stating that
that she
she attended
attended Gateway
Gateway Aliquippa to o
Aliquippa two

times, and Gateway
times, and Gateway Mt.
Mt. Pleasant
Pleasant once.
once. Icy at 92.
Id. at 92. Mother
Mother testified
testified that
that she
she

therapist had sent
believed her therapist completion letters to CYF for the first two
sent in completion

inpatient stays,
inpatient stays, and
and she testified ate
she testified ate the
the last
last time she was
time she was in
in inpatient,
inpatient, from
from January
January

February 29, 2024, that she completed
26 to February completed that stay and aacompletion letter was

sent to agency. Id. at 92. Mother did not follow
to the agency. follow,up to ensure documentation of

inpatient stays were actually received by CYF and stated, "I
these inpatient "Imean, to my
nay

knowledge,
knowledge, IIwas
was told
told that
that they
they were
were all
all e-mailed,
e-mailed, that
that they
they knew
knew what
what was
was going
going

on. IIdo know, to my
my knowledge, that in other hearings they've done the same

thing, they
thing, they didn't
didn't know that
that I completed, and then it was corrected. So I'm not.
I had completed, not

really sure on
really sure on why they're saying
why they're saying they
they didn't
didn't know
know that
that I1had
had completed
completed my
my

program, because
program, because they
they do
do know
know that.
that. It's
It's like
like no
no one
one is
is keeping
keeping the
the right
right answers
answers

written down,
written down, and they are
and they are all
all scrambling on different
scrambling on different cases."
cases." Id. at
at 92-93.
92-93.

Mother testified
Mother testified that
that she
she did
did multiple
multiple inpatient
inpatient stays
stays because
because she
she was
was having
having issues
issues

and did
and did not
not ""feel
feel secure
secure being home yet"
being home but felt
yet" but felt much
much better
better after
after her
her third
third

inpatient stay
inpatient stay at
at Gateway
Gateway Mt.
Mt. Pleasant.
Pleasant. Id. at
at 94.
94.

Mother testified about making aaself-referral to POWER the week before the

hearing, and testified by reading aaletter from POWER,
contested termination hearing,

17
stated. "[
which stated: Mother] participated in a
"[Mother] a walk-in LOCI assessment
walk-in POWER LOC7

Tuesday, 10/1.
Tuesday, 10/1. A
A urine
urine screen
screen was
was completed
completed and it did
and it did not
not indicate
indicate substance
substance use.
use.

[Mother] accepted
[Mother] the recommendation
accepted the recommendation for
for LOC. The recommendation
LOC. The recommendation is
is for
for 1.0
1.0

outpatient. [Mother[
outpatient [Mother[ accepted her referral of POWER New Day, and is scheduled

to start
to start on
on 10/10/2024
10/10/2024 at
at 3:00
3:00 p.m."
p.m. "8 Id. at
8 at 94.
94. Mother
Mother testified
testified that
that she
she did this
did this

self-referral to
self-referral to POWER
POWER because
because she
she needed to be
needed to be in
in some
some kind
kind of treatment to
of treatment to be
be

housing program.
considered for the ARIA housing program.9 Id. at 95. Mother continued her

testimony and
testimony and claiming
claiming prior
prior agency
agency caseworker
caseworker claimed
claimed she
she had to attend
had to attend groups,
groups,

which she did not want to do, and alleged "roadblocks" had been put up for her.

at 96.
Id. at 96.

When further
When further questioned
questioned by
by her
her attorney
attorney about
about attending
attending any
any other
other

outpatient drug and
outpatient drug and alcohol
alcohol services,
services, Mother
Mother testified,
testified, "I
"Itried
tried to
to do — Iwent
do I went -- II

attempted to go
attempted to go to
to group,
group, yes.."
yes." Id.
Id. at
at 97.
97. When
When asked
asked her
her current
current clean
clean date,
date,

Mother "My current clean date is 1/27/23 24.
Mother stated "My 24. I'm sorry." Id. Wheri
When

asked how this could be her clean date when aaurine container device was found on

her when
her when she
she went
went to
to aascreen
screen on
on May
May 6,
6, 2024,
2024, Mother
Mother explained
explained that
that she
she "did
"did

smoke marijuana.
smoke marijuana. Marijuana
Marijuana is
is not
not one of my
one of my problems.
problems. IIalso
also am
am in
in the
the middle
middle

LOC stands
77 LOC stands for "level of
for "level of care."
care."

POWER New
aaPOWER New Day,
Day, an
an outpatient substance abuse
outpatient substance abuse treatment
treatment program,
program, is
is part of
part of
the continuum of services they can offer individuals based on their
their-needs.

99 The ARIA housing program helps provide subsidized housing to individuals
The ARIA housing program helps provide subsidized housing to individuals
actively engaged in
actively engaged in treatment
treatment for
for substance
substance abuse.
abuse.

18
18
of
of working
working on
on a
a marijuana
marijuana card.
card. So
So I
I didn't
didn't know
know what
what to
to do,
do, because
because you
you guys
guys

hold
hold things
things agains
agains people,
people, and
and there's
there's no
no explanation
explanation or
or any of it.
any of it. Now.,
Now., my
my

sobriety
sobriety from
from hardcore
hardcore drugs,
drugs, that's
that's my
my sobriety_"
sobriety." Id,
Id. at
at 102-103.
102-103. Mother
Mother clarified
clarified

that
that her
her sobriety
sobriety date
date from
from drugs
drugs other
other than
than marijuana
marijuana was
was January
January 26,
26, 2024.
2024. Id.
Id. at
at

104.
104.

Mother testified
testified that
that she
she maintains
maintains her
her current
current sobriety
sobriety by
by keeping
keeping busy,
busy,

looking
looking for
for a
a job,
job, working
working on
on cars,
cars, and
and visiting
visiting with
with her
her children
children at
at her
her mother's
mother's

home.
home. Id. at
at 97-98.
97-98. Mother
Mother stated
stated that
that she
she has
has a
a doctor
doctor but
but itit isis just
just her
her primary
primary

care
care physician and
and testified
testified that
that "therapy isis something
something that
that would
would be
be very,
very, very
very

helpful to me.
me. It's
It's what
what I've
I've been wanting.
wanting. But
But I
I just
just keep
keep myself
myself busy
busy and
and

thinking
thinking about nay
my kids."
kids." Id.
Id. .at
at 98.
98. Mother
Mother did
did not
not provide
provide any
any explanation
explanation as
as to
to

her inability to access mental
mental health therapy
therapy during the
the twenty
twenty months the
the Children

had been in care.

With respect
respect to
to her other goals, Mother
Mother stated her first in- home service
in-home

worker was
was ""amazing"
amazing" but she left and was assigned,a
assigned a new in-home worker that

"And, I
I mean, I'm
Im sorry. I'm a
a certain type of person, and I
I have to feel

comfortable with a
a person
person who I
I am put in front of, who's supposed to be helping

me and things. And if I r
I don't feel comfortable with them, Idon't understand how

you guys
you guys want me to productively
productively work with them.
them." .
Id. at 99. Mother testified

that she stopped
stopped working
working with in-home services after the worker she liked left. Id.

19
With
Withrespect
respecttotohousing,
housing, Mother
Mothertestified
testifiedthat
thatshe
shewas
wasscheduled
scheduledtotomeet
meet

with
with someone
someonefrom
fromthe
theARIA
ARIAprogram
program later
laterthat
thatsame
sameweek,
week,as
asthe
thetermination
termination

heating, toto look
heating, lookatataddresses
addresses of
ofhomes
homesshe
she located. Id.
located. Id.

Mother
Mothertestified
testifiedthat
thatshe
she visits
visitsher
herChildren
Children three
threeor
orfour
fourtimes
times a
aweek
weekatather
her

Mother's home,
,Mother's home, and
and that
that she
she FaccTimes
FaceTimes with
with them
them when
when they
they get home from
gethome from

school. Id. Maternal
school. Id. Maternal grandmother
grandmother isis the
the court
court appointed medical and
appointedmedical andeducational
educational

for
for the
the children;
children; however,
however, Mother
Mother said
said that
that she
she accompanies
accompanies the
the Children
Children on
on their
their

medical appointments
medical and talks
appointments and talks toto the
the therapist. Id. atat 101;
therapist. Id. 101; see
see CYF
CYF Exhibit
Exhibit22-
-

Combine Court
Combine Court Orders.
Orders.

Mother
Mother testified
testified that
that the
the entire
entire time
time she
she had
had been
been working
working with
with CYF
CYF they
they

have
have "been
"been putting
putting nothing
nothing but
but roadblocks
roadblocks up
up for
for me"
me" and,
and aileged
alleged that
that her
her life
life had
had

been "disrupted"
been and ""literally
"disrupted" and went down
literally went down the
the tubes"
tubes" since
since CYF's
CYF's involvement.
involvement.

Id. atat 102.
Id. 102.

Mother
Mother did not present
did not present any
any credible
credible evidence
evidence or
or testimony
testimony to
to contradict
contradict the
the

and testimony
evidence and
evidence in support
testimony in support of this court's
of this court's conclusion.
conclusion. This
This court
court

appropriately
appropriately found
found that
that CYF
CYF presented
presented clear
clear and
and convincing
convincing evidence
evidence with
with

respect to 23
respect to 23 Pa. C.S. §$ 2511(a)(2).
Pa. C.S. Mother had
2511(a)(2). Mother had not
not made
made substantial,
substantial, meaningful
meaningful

progress
progress on
on her
her family
family service
service plan goals,
goals, which
which was
was critical
critical to
to reunification.
reunification. At
At

the time of
of the termination
termination hearing
hearing on October 9, 2024, Mother had
had just recently
recently

a self-referral to POWER in order, indicated
completed a so in order
indicated she did so order to
to

20
obtain
obtain housing
housing through
through the
the ARIA
ARIA program,
program, but
but had
had not
not yet
yet started
started treatment
treatment or
or

established
established housing
housing stability.
stability. Mother
Mother failed
failed to
to appreciate
appreciate how
how her
her actions
actions (or
(or lack
lack

of
of action)
action) impacted
impacted reunification
reunification efforts
efforts and
and instead
instead assigned
assigned the
the failure
failure of
of her
her

progress
progress to
to outside
outside forces,
forces, such
such as
as CYF.
CYF. At
At the time of the
the time the termination,
termination, the
the

Children
Children had
had been
been in
in care
care for
for twenty-months.
twenty-months. The
The younger
younger Child,
Child, removed
removed shortly
shortly

afterbirth
after birth having
having been
been born
born with
with substances
substances in his
his system,
system, never
never lived
lived in
in her
her care.
care,

These
These Children
Children could
could not
not wait
wait indefinitely
indefinitely for
for Mother
Mother to
to gain
gain the
the ability
ability or
or

willingness
willingness to address
address her
her court
court ordered
ordered goals,
goals, and
and the evidence
evidence was
was overwhelming
overwhelming

that Mother either
either could
could not
not or
or would
would not
not remedy
remedy the
the conditions
conditions that
that led
led these
these

Children
Children to
to be
be removed
removed from
from her
her care
care on
on February
February 2,
2, 2023.
2023. As
As such,
such, this
this court
court did
did

not
not commit
commit an error
error of
of law or
or abuse
abuse of
of discretion
discretion when
when entering
entering an
an order
order

terminating
terminating Mother's parental under §$ 25`11(a)(2).
parental rights under 2511(a)(2).

§2511(x)(5)
$2511(a)5) and
and (8)
(8)

Upon
Upon consideration
consideration of
of all
all of
of the
the testimony
testimony and
and evidence,
evidence, this
this court
court found
found

that CYF presented
presented clear
clear and convincing evidence that
that .Mother could not or would

not remedy
remedy the conditions which led to
to the removal
removal and placement of her Children

within a
a reasonable period
period of time, and that the services or assistance reasonably

available to Mother were not likely to remedy the conditions
conditions which led to the

removal or placement
placement of these Children in a
a reasonable period of time, and that

termination
termination of
of Mother's
Mother's rights
rights best
best served
served the
the needs
needs and
and welfare
welfare of
of the
the Children.
Children.

21
21
The
The record
record reflects
reflects that
that the
the Children
Children were
were removed
removed from
from Mother's
Mother's care
care on
on or
or

about
about February
February 2,
2, 2023
2023 when
when CYF
CYF obtained
obtained an
an emergency
emergency custody
custody order
order and
and spent
spent

the
the last
last twenty
twenty months
months in
in placements.
placement. CYF
CYF Exhibit
Exhibit 22-Combined
- Combined Court.
Court Orders.
Orders.

Therefore,
Therefore, this
this court
court correctly
correctly found
found that
that the
the Children had been
Children had been out
out of
ofMother's
Mother's

care
care for
for six
six and
and twelve
twelve months,
months, respectively,
respectively, as
as required
required by
by each
each subsection
subsection of
ofthe
the

statute.
statute.

While
While largely
largely addressed
addressed in
in the
the discussion
discussion section
section of
of §$2511(a)(2)
2511(a)(2) above,
above,

which,
which outlined
outlined the
the evidence
evidence and
and testimony
testimony in
in support
support of
ofMother's
Mother's inability
inability or
or

unwillingness
unwillingness to
to remedy
remedy the
the conditions
conditions that
that brought
brought these
these Children
Children into care, itit
into care,

was
was evident
evident by
by Mother's
Mother's own
own testimony
testimony in
in the
the hearing
hearing that
that she
she had
had just
just recently
recently

started
started to
to address
address specific
specific goals
goals related
related to
to substance
substance abuse.
abuse. She
She hadn't
hadn't even
even begun
begun

the
the recommended
recommended level
level of
of treatment
treatment received
received from
from her
her POWER
POWER self- referral days
self-referral days

before
before the
the termination
termination hearing.
hearing. Mother
Mother still had
had not
not obtained housing
housing stability.
stability,

She
She agreed
agreed that
that she
she failed to
to work
work with
with in-home
in-home services
services because
because she
she didn't
didn't like
like

the
the second
second worker that
that was assigned.
assigned. Mother
Mother testified that she
she thought
thought therapy
therapy

would be a
a good idea for her but
but had
had no evidence of
of participating in
in any mental
mental

health treatment.

In addition to looking at the testimony and evidence submitted by CYF, the

court considered the credible testimony and analysis provided by the court

appointed
appointed evaluator, Dr. Terry O'Hara, who conducted several evaluations in this

case between April to. September 2024. T.T. at 22; see C
April to YF Exhibit 11-- Dr. O'Hara
CYF

22
Evaluation
EvaluationReport
Report9/9/24.
9/9/24. Dr.
Dr. O'Hara
O'Haratestified
testifiedthat
thathis
hismost
mostrecent
recentindividual
individualof
of

Mother
Motherwas
wason
on September
September9,9,2024,
2024, atatwhich
whichtime
timehe
healso
alsoconducted
conductedan
an

interactional of
interactional ofMother
Motherand
andthe
theChildren,
Children, and
andan
aninteractional
interactionalof
ofmaternal.
maternal

grandmotherand
grandmother andthe
the Children. Id.
Children. Id.

Dr. O'Hara
Dr. O'Haratestified
testified that
thathe
he diagnosed
diagnosed Mother
Motherwith
withgeneralized
generalizedanxiety
anxiety

disorder,
disorder, unspecified
unspecified depressive
depressivedisorder
disorder,;ADHD
ADHD combined,
combined,presentation
presentationby
by

history,
history, with arule
with a rule out
out of
ofpanic
panic disorder,
disorder, stimulant
stimulant disorder,
disorder, mild
mildcocaine
cocaine and
and

sustained
sustained remission,
remission, opioid
opioid disorder
disorder-- mild
mild and
and sustained
sustained remission. Id. atat23.
remission. Id. 23. Dr.
Dr.

O'Hara testified
O'Hara testified that
that with
with respect
respect toto the
the cocaine
cocaine and
and opioid use disorder
opioid use disorder were
were

based.
based on Mother's
on Mother's account. Id.
account. Id.

Dr.
Dr. O'Hara
O'Hara had.
had several
several concerns
concerns regarding
regarding Mother's
Mother's presentation,
presentation, including
including

"externalized
"externalized responsibility for her
responsibility for her circumstances"
circumstances" wherein
wherein Mother
Mother was
was not
nottaking
taking

much
much responsibility
responsibility for
for CYF's
CYF's involvement
involvement and
and the
the placement
placement of
ofher
her children
children in
in

this
this case.
case. Id.
Id. at 24. Mother
at 24. Mother did
did acknowledge
acknowledge a
a history
history of
ofusing
using crack
crack cocaine
cocaine and
and

heroin and
heroin and that
that Mother's.
Mother's account,
account, she
she did
did not
not complete IOP and
complete IOP and denied
denied being
being

involved in
involved in services
services at
at that
that evaluation. Id. Dr.
evaluation. Id. Dr. O'Hara
O'Hara also
also noted
noted that
that Mother
Mother

reported
reported some
some significant
significant medical
medical issues
issues which
which included
included "lupus,
"lupus, fibromyalgia,
fibromyalgia,

rheumatoid arthritis"
rheumatoid
+
arthritis'' but,Mother
but Mother did
did not
not indicate
indicate that
that these
these conditions
conditions impacted
impacted

her ability
her to parent.
ability to Id. at
parent. Id. at 25.
25.

Dr. O'Hara observed that
that Mother displayed positive parenting
parenting skills in
in her

interactional with her children, where she
she praised, redirected, and encouraged age

23
during the interactional
appropriate skills and toys. Id. at 26. However, during

managing the younger
assessment, Mother reported that she had some difficulties managing younger

Child. Id. 'Dr.
Child. O'Hara
Dr. 0 'Hara observed that there
observed that there were times when
were times when Mother
Mother appeared to
appeared to

interact with the younger Child to the exclusion of the older Child. Id. Dr. O'Hara

reported that grandmother took the
that the younger Child was upset with maternal grandmother

older
older Child to the bathroom during the
the evaluation, and
and Mother commented
commented on how

"attached" the younger Child was with his maternal grandmother.
grandmother. Id,
Id.

At September
At the time of Mother's individual evaluation with Dr. O'Hara on September

residing with her long-term
9, 2024, Mother was residing long-teen boyfriend,
boyfriend, who was not
not the father

of either
of either Child,
Child, in
in the
the home
home of
of his
his mother
mother and
and his
his mother's
mother's paramour.
paramour. CYF
CYF

Exhibit I1 - Dr. O'Hara's Evaluation Report 9/9/24. Mother reported that this living

was "very
environment was "very chaotic." Id. When inquired as to whether she was in aa

position
position to care for the children's
children's needs and welfare at this
this time, she replied, ""II

need my
need own home.
my own home. I could at
I could at my Mom's house, there
my Mom's there was
was aareferral one year
referral one year ago
ago

through Family
through Family Links,
Links, I'm finally
finally getting
getting an interview and looking right now, I'm

way closer
way closer (to housing) than
(to housing) than last
last time."
time." Id.
Id Mother
Mother admitted
admitted she
she was
was not
not

employed. Id. Dr.
employed. Dr. O'Hara's
O'Hara's evaluation
evaluation stated:
stated:

Nevertheless, the children
Nevertheless, the children have
have apparently
apparently been
been in
in placement
placement for
for 19
19
months and
months and permanency
permanency is of
of urgent
urgent importance
importance for
for them,
them, especially
especially
considering some of the developmental needs for both children. In
considering
February, the Court determined
February, deteiiiiined minimal progress by [Mother]
[Mother] and
that [Mother]
that [Mother] and [her
and [her boyfriend]
boyfriend] were not submitting screens. In this
involving [Mother],
examiner's evaluation involving [Mother], she exhibited some some
parenting deficits
parenting deficits and
and reported
reported aahistory
history of
of significant
significant mental
mental health
health

_24
24
issues, substance abuse
issues, substance abuse concerns,
concerns, andand IPV
IPV [intimate partner violence]
[intimate partner violence]
in two
in relationships. This examiner does not
two relationships. not possess
possess evidence that that
these concerns
these concerns have been sufficiently
have been sufficiently addressed
addressed in in treatment
treatment with
with
[Mother]...
[Mother] ... AsAs aa result
result of
of these
these factors,,
factors, this
this examiner
examiner does
does not
not have
have
evidence that [Mother]
evidence that [Mother] isis in
in aa position
position to
to appropriately
appropriately care
care for
for the
the
children's needs
children's needs and
and welfare.
welfare. This
This examiner
examiner has has some
some concerns
concerns about
about
unsupervised
unsupervised contact
contact for
for the
the children
children with
with [Mother],
[Mother], without
without evidence
evidence
that she
that she has
has meaningfully
meaningfully addressed
addressed mental
mental health,
health, substance
substance abuse
abuse,;
and IPV
and IPV concerns.
concerns. There
There are
are some
some negative
negative indicators
indicators for
for prognosis,
prognosis,
as
as [ Mother] does
[Mother] does not appear motivated
not appear motivated to to participate
participate with
with intensive
intensive
dual-diagnosis
dual-diagnosis services, which would be advisable for her.

Exhibit,1I-- Dr. O'Hara Evaluation
CYF Exhibit Report 9/9/24. The testimony
Evaluation Report testimony and report
report

from Dr. O'Hara contributed to the compelling
compelling and credible evidence that

supported termination
supported termination pursuant
pursuant §2511(a)(5) and (8).
§2511 (a)(5) and (8).

provided aanumber of referrals and services that would reasonably
CYF had provided

allow
allow Mother to address
Mother to the conditions
address the conditions that
that led
led to
to removal
removal and
and Mother
Mother did
did not
not

such. assistance. Mother made a
avail herself of such self-referral. to POWER for an
a self-referral

assessment aaweek hearing, had not started treatment, and
week before the termination hearing,

testified
testified she did this qualify for
this so she could qualify for housing assistance through the ARIA

program. Mother was unable to present
program. present or provide
provide any documentation, reliable

testimony,
testimony, or evidence that would credibly
credibly support that Mother could address these

her
her goals
goals with these services in a
a reasonable time. The court appointed evaluator

reached
reached aasimilar conclusion and
similar conclusion and found
found that
that these
these Children
Children were in need
were in need of
o'f'

permanency and Mother could not appropriately care for their needs and welfare.
permanency

comparison, the matemal
In comparison, maternal grandmother
grandmother demonstrated
demonstrated ""stability,
stability, strong parenting

skills" during
skills" her interactional
during her interactional evaluation
evaluation with
with the
the Children.
Children. Thus,
Thus, this
this court
court

25
25
soundlyreached
soundly reachedthe
theconclusion
conclusionthat
thattermination
terminationand
andadoption withtheir
adoptionwith their

grandmotherwould
grandmother wouldbest
bestserve
servethe
theneeds
needsand
andwelfare
welfareof
ofthese
theseyoung Children.
youngChildren.

The
Thesecond
secondpart
partof
ofthe
the§ §25
2511(a)(5)
I l(a)(5)and
and( 8)
(8)analysis
analysisrequires
requiresthe
thecourt
courttoto

consideritittermination
consider terminationwould
wouldbest
bestserve
servethe
theneeds
needs·and
andwelfare
welfareof
ofthe
thechild.
child. This
This

courtwill
court willelaborate
elaboratefurther
furtheron
onthe
thebest
bestinterest
interestanalysis, whichisisa
analysis,which acomponent of
componentof

thesetwo
these twosubsections,
subsections,within the§$2511
withinthe 2511(b) sectionbelow.
(b) section below.

§2511 (b)
$2511(b)

Having
Havingfound
found that
that CYF
CYF.met
mettheir
theirstatutory
statutory burden
burden pursuant
pursuanttoto the
the statutory
statutory

requirements pursuant,to
requirements pursuantto §6$2511(a), the court
2511(a), the courtthen
then turned
turned toto the
the best
best interest
interest

analysis
analysis required
required under
under§$2511(b). Athorough
251.1(b). A thorough review
review of
ofthe
the record
record inin this
this case
case

demonstrates that
demonstrates that termination
termination of
ofMother's
Mother's parental rights clearly
parental rights and convincingly
clearly and convincingly

meets the
meets the needs
needs and
and welfare
welfare of
ofthe
the Children
Children and
and that
that termination
termination was overall inin the
was overall the

Children's best
Children's best interest.
interest. The
The court
court does
does not
not dispute that Mother
dispute that Mother loves
loves her
her Children
Children

and has
and has a
a desire
desire to
to parent her Children.
parent her Children. Nevertheless,
Nevertheless, once
once grounds have been
grounds have been

established
established pursuant
pursuant to
to §$2511(a),
2511(a), the
the court
court must
must give "primary consideration
give "primary consideration to
to the
the

developmental,
developmental, physical and emotional
physical and emotional needs
needs and
and welfare
welfare of
of the
the child.
child." 23 Pa.
23 Pa.

C.S. §82511(b)
C.S. 2511(b).

Dr. O'Hara
Dr. O'Hara indicated his report
indicated- his that "potential
report that detriment should
"potential detriment should be
be weighted
weighted

against
against [Mother's]
[Mother's] stability, the length
stability, the of time
length of time the
the children
children have
have been
been in
in care,
care, the
the

children's need
children's need for
for permanency, and
and the
the children's
children's meaningful
meaningful relationship with
relationship with

26
theirmaternal
their maternalgrandmother."
grandmother." CYF
CYFExhibit
Exhibit1 1- Dr.O'Hara
- Dr. O'HaraEvaluation
EvaluationReport
Report

9/9/24.
9/9/24.

Evidence
Evidenceand
andtestimony
testimonyregarding
regardingMother's
Mother'sparenting skillsand
parentingskills andcapacity
capacity

wereaddressed
were addressedand
andassessed
assessedby
byDr.
Dr.O'Hara,
O'Hara,and
andCYF
CYFprovided
providedample
ampletestimony
testimony

thatMother
that Motherfailed
failedtotoconsistently availherself
consistentlyavail herselfof
ofvisitation
visitationsuch
suchthat
thatshe
shewas
wasable
able

tomove
to, movetotounsupervised
unsupervisedvisits
visitstotoovernights
overnightstotoreunification.
reunification. After
Aftergaining court
gainingcourt

ordered permission
ordered permissiontotohave
haveunsupervised withher
unsupervisedwith herChildren,
Children, Mother
Motherrelapsed
relapsed

within
within weeks,
weeks.and
andattended aurine
attendeda urine screen
screen atatthe
theAllegheny
AlleghenyCounty
CountyHealth
Health

witha
Departmentwith
Department aurine
urine screen
screen device
device strapped
strapped toto her
herleg to avoid
legto avoid a
apositive result.
positive result.

Moreover,
Moreover, Mother's
Mother's testimony
testimony demonstrated
demonstrated her
her lack
lack of
ofunderstanding
understanding her
her role
role inin

how these
how these conditions
conditions and
and issues,
issues, which
which led
led toto removal,
removal, continued
continued to
to exist.
exist. Instead
Instead

oftaking
of taking responsibility or ownership,
responsibility.or Mother testified
ownership, Mother testified that
that CYF
CYF either
either put
put up
up

roadblocks or
roadblocks or were
were being dishonest, and
being dishonest, and made
made decisions
decisions about
about participating
participating inin

services
services based
based on
on whether
whether she
she liked
liked the
the assigned -home service
in-home
assigned in service worker.
worker. Mother
Mother

continually blamed others
continually blamed others for
for her
her lack
lack of
of successful
successful progress or perceived
progress or perceived hurdles
hurdles

that impeded
that her progress.
impeded her Dr. O'Hara
progress. Dr. concluded that
aptly concluded
O'Hara aptly that Mother
Mother was
was not
not in
in the
the

position,
position, at
at an
an evaluation
evaluation a
a month
month prior
prior to the termination
to the termination proceeding,
proceeding, to
to

appropriately look after
appropriately look after the Children's needs
the Children's needs and
and welfare..
welfare.

This Court is
is charged
charged with examining intangibles
intangibles such as love,
love, comfort,
comfort,

security, and
and stability, identified as
stability, identified as a
a key of a
component of
key component a child's
child's needs
needs and
and welfare.
welfare.

In re K.T., 1105 ((Pa.
KT,, 296 A.3d 1085, 1105 Pa. 2023). Where a
a bond exists between the

27
parent
parent and
and child,
child, this
this court
court must
must also
also examine
examine whether
whether termination
termination would
would destroy
destroy a
a

"necessary
"necessary and
and beneficial
beneficial relationship"
relationship" that
that could
could possibly
possibly cause
cause a
a child
child to
to suffer
suffer

extreme
extreme emotional
emotional circumstances.
circumstances. Id.
Id. This
This court
court finds
finds that while Mother
that while Mother may
may

have
have an
an emotional
emotional bond
bond with
with these
these Children,
Children, this
this isis only
only one
one of
of the
the many
many factors
factors

that
that the
the.court
court is
is charged
charged with
with considering
considering when
when deteniiining
determining what
what is
is in
in the
the best
best

interests
interests of
of each
each Child.
Child.

Dr.
Dr: O'Hara
O'Hara testified
testified that
that during
during the
the interactional
interactional evaluation
evaluation with
with maternal
maternal

grandmother he
he observed
observed her
her to
to possess
possess several
several positive
positive parenting
parenting skills
skills and
and a
a

positive bond with,the
with the Children.
Children. T.T.
TT. at 28,
28, 30,
30. Dr.
Dr. O'Hara,
O'Hara, through
through his
his collateral
collateral

contacts, testified that the
the foster care
care agency
agency working with maternal
maternal grandmother
grandmother

did concerns about
did not have any concerns about her
her care
care of
of the
the Children.
Children. Id.
Id. at
at 31.
31. Dr.
Dr. O'Hara's
O'Hara's

testimony was that any potential detriment that
that termination
termination could
could have
have on
on these
these

Children would be mitigated by the fact that the Children were with the maternal

grandmother,
grandmother, stating
stating "I
"I think that
that would
would be
be a
a potential mitigating factor, yes.

[Maternal grandmother] appears very open to contact between the children
children with

her daughter,
daughter, especially
especially if
ifher daughter is doing well and remaining clean and

adhering
adhering to what's recommended of her. I
I would consider the children's

relationship
relationship with
with their maternal grandmother,
grandmother, the stability with
with [maternal
[maternal

grandmother].
grandmother]. I
I would say facts should also be weighed, including the amount of

time that the children have been out of parental care,
care, [Mother's]
[Mother's] lack of

demonstration of
of sufficiently
sufficiently addressing the issues
issues that necessitated placement. So

28'
28
Ithink
I thinkyes,
yes,all
allof
ofthose
thosefactors
factorsshould
shouldbe
beconsidered."
considered." Id.
Id. atat33.
33. Dr.
Dr.O'Hara
O'Hara

testified
testifiedthat
thatpermanency
permanencyfor
forChildren
Childrenthat
thathad
hadbeen
beeninincare
carethis
thislong
longwas
wascritically
critically

important,
important, stating,,
stating, ""It
It sets
setsthe
the foundation
foundation for
fora
anormal
normal development
developmenttrajectory.
trajectory.

Childrendo
Children domuch
muchbetter
betterwhen
whenthey're
they're ininsituations
situationsof
ofsafety,
safety, stability, and
stability, and

Id. atat44.
security." Id.
security." 44.

The
The CYF
CYFpermanency
permanency supervisor,
supervisor, Timothy
TimothyJashinski,
Jashinski,testified
testifiedabout
abouthis
his

observations
observations of
ofthe
the Children
Children inin the
thehome
home of
ofthe
the maternal
maternal grandmother.
grandmother. "The
"The

children
children are
are very
very attached
attached toto her.
her. They
They look
look for
forher
her to
to meet
meettheir
theirneeds.
needs. I
I mean,
mean, a
a

stranger corning
stranger coming to
to their
theirhouse,
house, they were a
they were a little
little apprehensive ofme
apprehensive of me being there,
being there,

so they
so they would
would go
go to
to her
her for
for support. But she
support. But she seems
seems to
to be
be providing for all
providing for all of
oftheir
their

needs.
needs. There
There were
were no
no concerns
concerns regarding
regarding their
their safety.
safety. They
They looked
looked to
to her
her for
for

reassurance,
reassurance, and
and she
she does
does a
a nice
nicejob
job with
with them."
them." Id.
Id. at
at 87.
87. Mr.
Mr. Jashinski
Jashinski reported
reported

that
that the
the children
children were
were receiving
receiving developmental
developmental services,
services, had
had age
age appropriate
appropriate toys
toys

and activities
and activities in
in the
the home,
home, and
and were
were up to date
up to datemedically. Id.
medically. Id.

This
This court
court agreed
agreed with
with the
the evidence
evidence and
and testimony
testimony presented
presented by
by CYF,
CYF, as
as

well
well as
as by
by Dr.
Dr. O'Hara,
O'Hara, and
and found
found that
that any
any potential
potential detriment
detriment to
to the
the Children
Children from
from

terminating
terminating Mother's
Mother's rights
rights would
would be
be mitigated
mitigated by
by the
the loving
loving and
and secure
secure

relationship
relationship the
the Children
Children and
and maternal
maternal grandmother
grandmother had
had established.
established. Additionally,
Additionally,

this court found that
that the
the time
time in care necessitated
necessitated permanency
permanency critical
critical to
to their
their best
best

interests, and that
that tennination would best
best meet the developmental, physical
physical and

emotional needs and welfare of
of the Children. For the foregoing reasons, this,
this. court

29
did
did not
not commit
commit an
an error
error of
of law
law or
or abuse
abuse of
of discretion finding that termination
discretion in finding teniiination

best
best met
met the
the needs
needs and,
and welfare
welfare pursuant to
to §§251
2511(b).
l(b).

Conclusion

Based on the opinion
opinion set forth, this court's orders granting the involuntary
orders granting involuntary

termination
termination of
of parental
parental rights
rights to
to Mother
Mother should
should be
be affirmed.
affirmed.

BY THE COURT:

------------'--- , J.
.J.

30'
30

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10807447. Public record. Not legal advice.