Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A special needs toddler had been endangered by his parents’ methamphetamine use and a trial court correctly adjudicated the boy as a child in need of services, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled Friday in affirming the court’s judgment.
On May 4, 2022, Indiana Department of Child Services received a report alleging possible abuse and neglect of D.P., a 4-year-old nonverbal child with marks and bruises who was unable to communicate what happened to him.
The child is the son of D.P., his father, and H.P., his mother.
According to court records, DCS caseworker JoAnn Miller began an investigation that eventually ruled out physical abuse and focused instead on the parents’ substance abuse issues and whether they had the ability to be safe and sober caregivers for the child.
The parents were uncooperative with DCS from the outset.
DCS sought and obtained an order compelling the parents to allow DCS into their home, give the agency access to the child and provide drug screens.
On the third attempt by DCS to serve the order, the mother finally allowed them into the home, but the child was not there.
The parents had taken the child to a relative’s home because they knew DCS would be coming, but the mother gave caseworkers the address and they were able to visit the child there.
Both parents submitted to drug screens.
While those samples were being tested, the child remained in the parents’ care.
In late June 2022, DCS was called because the child had been found wandering alone about a half mile from his rural home at 1:30 a.m.
The mother was asleep when the child left the house and the father was at a friend’s house.
Neither parent was aware the child was missing until after he had been found.
This was the second time the child left a residence without the parents’ knowledge while in their care, according to court records.
During its investigation, DCS learned the father had several pending criminal charges in two counties for drug-related offenses and a charge of operating a motor vehicle with false plates.
DCS received the mother’s drug screen results in early June 2022 and received the father’s results on July 6.
Both screens were positive for meth.
The day after receiving the father’s drug-screen results, DCS sought an emergency detention order.
The Jennings Circuit Court entered the order the same day, and DCS took custody of the child on July 9.
The child was initially placed in a foster home.
The trial court found probable cause the child was a CHINS and authorized DCS to file a CHINS petition, due to the parents’ substance abuse issues, positive drug tests for meth, the child’s high level of needs and the parents’ lack of cooperation with DCS.
The trial court held a CHINS fact-finding hearing on Sept. 6, 2022.
The court determined the child was a CHINS and entered a dispositional order on Nov. 1, 2022.
The mother and father appealed.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling the trial court’s CHINS determination is not clearly erroneous and that DCS proved the child had been seriously endangered by the parents’ drug use and their inability to provide supervision.
Judge Dana Kenworthy wrote the opinion for the appellate court.
Kenworthy noted that the parents, although they filed separate appeals, made the same argument: that the trial court’s CHINS determination was clearly erroneous because DCS failed to prove parental neglect that seriously endangered the child, the child had unmet needs, or the child’s needs are unlikely to be met without state intervention.
The parents each acknowledged one positive drug test, but argued there was no evidence they used or possessed meth in the child’s presence, cared for the child while under the influence of meth, or endangered the child by their use of meth.
Kenworthy wrote the parents did not admit to using meth despite their positive drug screens.
“Parents exhibited no insight into their substance use, denying they have a problem with methamphetamine and believing their use of methamphetamine has nothing to do with Child or their ability to take care of him,” Kenworthy wrote.
Kenworthy wrote that the evidence and reasonable inferences from the evidence show the parents used meth while caring for the child, their ability to adequately supervise him was affected, and he was endangered due to the lack of proper supervision.
The appellate judge added that there was evidence before the court the parents had used meth while caring for the child and did not appreciate the dangers the child faced because of their use.
“And given the trial court found Parents’ testimony about their methamphetamine use lacked credibility, there was no evidence Parents had stopped or were seeking to stop using methamphetamine. A court need not ‘wait until a tragedy occurs to intervene,’” Kenworthy wrote.
Judge Terry Crone and Senior Judge Margret Robb concurred.
The case is In the Matter of: D.P. (Minor Child), Child in Need of Services, H.P. (Mother) and D.P. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services, 22A-JC-2836.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.