In Re Eden F.

741 A.2d 873 (1999)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was born in Hartford and spent the majority of her childhood in a foster home. In 1975, at the age of fifteen, D was admitted for psychiatric care. D was admitted on several more occasions with one stay lasting for more than one year. D was diagnosed with chronic undifferentiated schizophrenia and other disorders over the years including bipolar disorder with psychotic features. While at the facility, D met and married Thomas F. The first child, Eden, was born on July 2, 1988. Eden is a child with special needs. P removed Eden from D's care when she was only five days old, due to D's psychiatric state. Eden was committed to the commissioner . . . as a neglected child because of the hospital admission of D. Eden remained in foster care until she was nearly three years old. Eden began living with D on February 1, 1991. While Eden lived with D, P worked with D and provided a number of services to her. On June 13, 1991, P filed a petition to revoke Eden's commitment. The court granted the motion to revoke commitment on August 7, 1991. Referrals began to reach P regarding D's mistreatment of Eden. Right before D's second child, Joann, was born on September 8, 1992, the Manchester police department report stated that D complained of sexual assault and strange goings on at the home. She claims that the alleged father of Joann sneaks in through the window at about 1:30 a.m. and sexually assaults [her]. It was noted that the condition of the apartment is very slovenly with trash and clutter strewn about. The smoke detector was also deactivated due to the removal of the battery.' She also claimed that the father would break into her apartment with seven men who sexually harassed her and performed witchcraft techniques on her. In 1993, D then left Eden at the emergency room visitor's lounge to care for Joann, who was 7 months old. D was admitted, and P invoked a ninety-six-hour hold on both children, who have been cared for in the same foster home ever since. D was eventually discharged. P filed a petition seeking the commitment of Eden and Joann. On that date, the court granted an order of temporary custody of both children to P. The court adjudicated Eden and Joann neglected based on D's plea of nolo contendere. The court committed the children to the department for the statutory period. D signed, and the court entered, a new set of expectations. P developed an extensive plan of rehabilitation. Eventually, 4 weeks of unsupervised visitation began. These visits were not assessed. The children did not show any evidence of physical abuse. In late October, 1994, a decision was made to return Eden to D on a trial basis for two months to make a final determination of D's capabilities. Difficulties with the reunification quickly appeared. Eden did not attend school for almost three weeks. P was aware before Eden was returned to D, that there was a problem with the Manchester board of education in gaining her admission. Nevertheless, P returned her. The department removed Eden from D's home and returned her to foster care. D left Eden in the care of two men, one of whom D hardly knew, but who was acquainted with D's female friend. The child of D's female friend was also there. When D returned later that evening, there were beer cans strewn about her apartment, the sink was full of dishes, and Eden's bedroom was 'trashed.' There was no indication, however, that Eden had been harmed in any way. There were anonymous reports of Eden crying for D not to hit her. P filed petitions in the Superior Court, Juvenile Matters, seeking to terminate the parental rights of D, Randy M., the alleged father of Joann, and Thomas F., the father of Eden. The trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that the parents had not achieved a useful and constructive role as parents. On appeal, the Appellate Court concluded that, pursuant to § 17a-112, the trial court was required to find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the department had made reasonable efforts to reunite Eden and Joann with D. The Appellate Court further concluded that the facts did not support such a finding with respect to either child. It reversed the trial court's judgment. This appeal resulted.