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NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37 IN THE INTEREST OF: N.B., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: T.W., MOTHER : : : : : No.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. 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 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 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 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.". 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. 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

:. ~. • 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

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,

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

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. 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 ((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 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 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.

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 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 A.3d A.3d 434, 434, 443 443_(Pa (Pa.

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 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).

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 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.

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." 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.

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 - Certified Criminal Records.

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 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,

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 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. 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.

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

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.

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 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 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 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 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 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

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 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' 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 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'