Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.
IN THE
ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION ONE
v.
AFFIRMED
COUNSEL
MEMORANDUM DECISION
M c M U R D I E, Judge:
BACKGROUND
2
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
services, and parenting classes. From August 2014 to January 2015, Mother
tested positive for high levels of opiates.3 Mother advised DCS that she had
been in a car accident ten years before, which required surgery to put a
metal cage in her back, and had been on prescription pain medication ever
since. Mother participated in a psychiatric evaluation, a psychological
evaluation, a neuropsychological evaluation, domestic violence classes,
parent-aide services, and parenting classes. She failed to complete
substance-abuse treatment and individualized counseling with a focus on
domestic violence.
4 Mother did not originally contest the first severance petition when
A.T. was placed with maternal grandmother. After Father filed a motion for
change in physical custody, which was eventually supported by DCS, DCS
decided to withdraw from maternal grandmothers original severance
petition and file its own. Mother contested DCSs renewed motion for
termination of parental rights.
3
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
DISCUSSION
6 Mother claims that the court should review the evidence de novo
alleging that the juvenile court did not apply the correct legal standard to
the facts in resolving the issues. The court finds nothing in the record to
support Mothers claim and will therefore not review the evidence de novo.
4
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
5
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
she was able to parent A.T. appropriately when she was under the influence
of the medication. Evidence in the record from Dr. Gallo, Mothers former
primary-care physician, Dr. Parker, the psychiatrist who completed
Mothers psychiatric evaluation, and the DCS case worker assigned to A.T.,
all supported the conclusion that Mother was unable to effectively parent
due to her addiction. As a result, the juvenile court did not err in finding
that Mother was unable to discharge her parental responsibilities as a result
of substance abuse.
7 There was additional testimony from the DCS case worker that even
after completion of Mothers substance abuse program, DCS would need to
see sustained sobriety in an unstructured setting before reunification could
take place.
6
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
19 The juvenile court found that severance was in the childs best
interests because it would allow a plan of adoption with the paternal
grandparents to move forward, providing A.T. with a safe and stable home.
The courts ruling is supported by the fact that the child is already in a
placement with the paternal grandparents that is meeting all of the childs
needs. Furthermore, in the event that the paternal grandparents could not
adopt A.T., the case worker testified that he is otherwise adoptable and has
no special needs.
7
KRISTI S. v. DCS, A.T.
Decision of the Court
child, which is a separate issue. See Antonio M. v. ADES, 222 Ariz. 369, 370-
71, 2 (App. 2009). The court does not weigh alternative placement options
when determining if severance is in the childs best interests, only whether
an existing placement is meeting the needs of the child or whether there is
an adoptive placement immediately available. Id. at 371, 2 (quoting
Audra T. v. ADES, 194 Ariz. 376, 377, 5 (App. 1998)). As a result, we decline
to address this argument.
CONCLUSION