Reversal: COA ‘stunned’ by CHINS finding for girl after fight

A teenager with behavioral problems was released from her child in need of services adjudication when the Indiana Court of Appeals found there was insufficient evidence to support the ruling.

When her two teenage daughters engaged in a fight and couldn’t be stopped, Mother T.A. called police to help break it up. One of the girls, M.W., struggled with behavioral and emotional problems. M.W. was placed in emergency shelter care and her sister, L.F., was placed in relative care after officers who de-escalated their fight ultimately arrested T.A. and accused her of domestic battery. The charge was later dismissed.

Both children were adjudicated as CHINS, and although L.F. was eventually returned to mother’s care and custody, M.W. continued to be placed outside of the home.

At a May 2018 fact-finding hearing, a DCS family case manager and family therapists testified that sessions with the family had been very productive and found T.A. to be a loving mother with great parenting skills. It was also noted that individual therapy had been scheduled for both daughters and that T.A. voluntarily participated in every service requested by DCS.

In June 2018, the juvenile court issued an order finding that L.F. was not a CHINS, but that M.W. still was. On appeal, T.A. argued that there was insufficient evidence supporting M.W.’s CHINS adjudication, to which the appellate court agreed.

“Quite frankly, we are stunned that the juvenile court found (M.W.) to be a CHINS,” Judge John G. Baker wrote for the court. “There is a dearth of evidence supporting a conclusion that her mental or physical condition was seriously impaired or seriously endangered as a result of anything done or not done by Mother.

“Yes, it is apparent that (M.W.) has serious behavioral issues and needs therapeutic support (though she has no diagnoses or prescribed medication), but that, alone, does not support a conclusion that she was seriously impaired or seriously endangered.”

The appellate court further found that mother agreed M.W. needed therapy and better communication skills, as did as the rest of the family. However, it found that the singular physical altercation between M.W. and her sister did not support a CHINS finding.

“The services provided by DCS while the CHINS case was pending gave the family a running start. The services were helping, and both Mother and Child seemed to realize it. From the outset, by calling the police, Mother showed that she simply needed some help — and she got it, through the services provided by DCS,” Baker wrote. “By the time of the CHINS hearing, it was readily apparent that Child was not seriously endangered and, even more critically, that the coercive intervention of the court was not required.”

Under the circumstances, the appellate court thus found the juvenile court erred in finding M.W. to be a CHINS in In the Matter of M.W. (Minor Child), A Child in Need of Services, and T.A. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services,18A-JC-1534.

The appellate court additionally noted that considering the numerous CHINS adjudications reversed in recent years for a notable lack of sufficient evidence, parties involved in Marion Superior Court CHINS proceedings should be mindful of the families who truly need the support of CHINS cases, versus those who do not.