J-A04011-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37 IN THE INTEREST OF: Z.A.C.S., A : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MINOR : PENNSYLVANIA : : APPEAL OF: Z.A.C.S., A MINOR : : : : : No. 1463 MDA 2024 Appeal from the Decree Entered September 7, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Orphans' Court at No(s): 2024-0069a

BEFORE: LAZARUS, P.J., NICHOLS, J., and SULLIVAN, J.

MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, P.J.: FILED: JUNE 10, 2025 Z.A.C.S., a minor, (Child) (born June 2014) appeals from the final decree,1 entered in the Court of Common Pleas of York County, Orphans’ Court Division, terminating the parental rights of Child’s mother, L.M. (Mother), after a hearing before the Honorable N. Christopher Menges.2 After careful review, we affirm based on Judge Menges’ opinion. ____________________________________________

1 Laura L. Smith, Esquire, represented Child at the termination hearing and represents Child on appeal. Daniel D. Morley, Esquire, was appointed guardian ad litem for Child (and her siblings) at the termination hearing. See Pa.C.S.A. § 2313(a); see also Matter of Adoption of A.C.M., 333 A.3d 704 (Pa. Super. 2025).

2 Mother’s parental rights to three other children were also involuntarily terminated by Judge Menges. R.R.S., Child’s father, is not the father of Mother’s other three other children. Mother’s appeals in those cases, and her appeal with respect to Child, are docketed at 1465 MDA 2024, 1466 MDA 2024, 1467 MDA 2024, and 1468 MDA 2024. Mother’s cases were consolidated below, and the trial court’s opinion in the instant case, Child’s (Footnote Continued Next Page) J-A04011-25

York County Office of Children, Youth, and Families (CYF) became involved with this family in 2017 as a result of allegations of Child’s truancy,3 Mother’s lack of housing and supervision, and Mother’s substance abuse and mental health issues. In January 2022, CYF filed a dependency petition, which was later withdrawn.

In January 2023, CYF received a new referral regarding allegations of abandonment. Child, along with two younger siblings, was found in a motel room without Mother; the referral also alleged that there was “marijuana, crack, and a scale” observed in the room with the children. See N.T. TPR Hearing, supra at 2, Ex. 1. Mother was later located at the back of the motel.

Mother was arrested, was charged with endangering the welfare of children, and faced additional drug charges.

At the time of her arrest, Mother had fifteen outstanding warrants.

Mother is currently out on bail, continues to reside at the Red Roof Inn in York City, and reports that she is employed at OSM Worldwide and works Monday through Friday, 8 hours each day.

At a shelter care hearing, the godmother of one of Mother’s children offered to be a resource for all three children.4 ____________________________________________

appeal, is an incorporated opinion with respect to Mother’s consolidated cases and addresses Child’s issues in this appeal.

3 An initial family service plan (FSP) noted Child had 79 absences and was 46 days truant. See N.T. Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) Hearing, 7/19/24, at 2, Ex.1.

4 At this time, Mother’s fourth child had not yet been born.

-2- J-A04011-25

CYF recommended Child’s physical and legal custody remain with the agency for placement with this individual as emergency kinship caregiver. All parties agreed to this arrangement.

On January 18, 2023, Child was adjudicated dependent.5 The initial goal was return to parent or guardian. Four family service plans (FSP) were prepared for the family—on July 13, 2021, January 26, 2023, July 24, 2023, and January 5, 2024. See N.T., TPR Hearing, supra at 13-14. Mother’s goals were as follows: maintain safe, stable housing for Child; maintain employment, complete drug and alcohol evaluations and testing and follow through with recommendations; cooperate with in-home team and early intervention; and complete a mental health evaluation.

In a June 21, 2023 permanency review order, the court found no compliance by Mother. In a December 7, 2023 permanency review order, the court found Mother had minimally complied with the permanency plan. On March 6, 2024, following a status review, the court confirmed its prior adjudication of dependency and changed the placement goal to adoption. See id. at 97.

On April 29, 2024, CYF filed a petition for involuntary termination of parental rights with respect to Child. The court directed counsel enter into a ____________________________________________

5 CYF’s petition incorrectly avers Child was adjudicated dependent on November 18, 2023. See Petition for Involuntary Termination of Parental Rights, 4/29/24, at 4. Child’s two younger siblings were also adjudicated dependent. As noted above, Mother’s youngest child, her fourth, had not been born. See n.4, supra.

-3- J-A04011-25

Stipulation of Counsel;6 after counsel complied with the court’s order, the court held a termination hearing on July 19, 2024 and September 6, 2024.7 At the hearing, the court heard testimony from the following: Abbie Fulton, Catholic Charities; Ellie Williams, executive director and lead mental health therapist at EquiTeam Support Services; Susan Scott, program director at PA Child Support Services; and Tanner Swarr, CYF caseworker.

At the time of the hearing, Child had been in placement for 20 months, Mother had been incarcerated on and off throughout the case, and Mother had not completed her court-ordered permanency plan goals.

Following the hearing, the court entered a decree terminating Mother’s parental rights. See Final Decree, 9/6/24. Child filed a timely appeal. Both Child and the trial court complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925. Child raises the following issues on appeal: 1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that CYF had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights of [Mother] should be terminated pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(1)?

2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that CYF had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights of [Mother] should be terminated pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(2)?

3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that CYF had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the ____________________________________________

6 The Stipulation of Counsel was filed on July 15, 2024 and admitted into the record. See N.T., TPR Hearing, supra at 15.

7 At the time of the hearing, Mother was incarcerated at York County Prison for 60 days for driving while under suspension.

-4- J-A04011-25

parental rights of [Mother] should be terminated pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(5)?

4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that CYF had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights of [Mother] should be terminated pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(8)?

5. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding that CYF had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights of [Mother] should be terminated pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(b)?

Appellant’s Brief, at i-ii.

In a proceeding to terminate parental rights involuntarily, the burden of proof is on the party seeking termination to establish by clear and convincing evidence the existence of grounds for doing so. The standard of clear and convincing evidence is defined as testimony that is so “clear, direct, weighty[,] and convincing as to enable the trier of fact to come to a clear conviction, without hesitance, of the truth of the precise facts in issue.” It is well established that a court must examine the individual circumstances of each and every case and consider all explanations offered by the parent to determine if the evidence in light of the totality of the circumstances clearly warrants termination.

In re Adoption of S.M., 816 A.2d 1117, 1122 (Pa. Super. 2003) (citation omitted). See also In re C.P., 901 A.2d 516, 520 (Pa. Super. 2006) (party seeking termination of parental rights bears burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that at least one of eight grounds for termination under Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a) exists and that termination promotes emotional needs and welfare of child set forth in 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(b)).

We review a trial court’s decision to involuntarily terminate parental rights for an abuse of discretion or error of law. In re A.R., 837 A.2d 560,

-5- J-A04011-25

563 (Pa. Super. 2003). Our scope of review is limited to determining whether the trial court's order is supported by competent evidence. Id. After a careful review of the record, the briefs on appeal, and the relevant case law, we agree with the trial court that CYF presented clear and convincing evidence to terminate Mother’s parental rights under sections 2511(a) and (b) and, therefore, we find no abuse of discretion. A.R., supra, We rely upon Judge Menges’ considered opinion to affirm the order terminating Mother’s parental rights. See Trial Court Opinion, 11/6/24, at 14-28 (termination proper under section 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(8), and (b) where court found CYF offered clear and convincing evidence that: Mother failed to perform parental duties and was unable to remedy conditions leading to Child’s placement; Mother has caused Child to be without essential parental care and the conditions and causes of neglect will not be remedied; Child has been removed from Mother’s care for more than six months and, it is “not clear that Mother will be able to remedy these conditions in a reasonable time.” id. at 19; Child has been removed from Mother’s care for at least twelve months and the conditions that led to removal continue to exist and termination best serves Child’s needs and welfare; termination would best Child’s developmental, physical, and emotional needs and welfare as Child has “a wonderful and healthy relationship” with kinship placement and pre- adoptive resource has been identified; and, even though Child has bond with Mother, maintaining that bond does not serve Child’s needs and Child is thriving in placement.).

-6- J-A04011-25

We instruct the parties to attach a copy of Judge Menges’ opinion in the event of further proceedings in the matter.

Decree affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Benjamin D. Kohler, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 6/10/2025

-7- Received 12/5/2024 3:32:52 FMtBWplfrib05720t2G26dDd:®Sst?kYt 332-52 A8lpt b0680/24.6008 %6.9et Filed 12/5/2024 3:32:00 Fled Superior Court Middle District 3.32.00 PM Superior 1463 1463 MDA 10DA 2024

C APPENDIX C IN THE THE COURT COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLEAS OF YORK COUNTY, YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA ORPHAN'S COURT DIVISION IN IN THE INTEREST INTEREST OF: No.: 2024-0069 Z.A.C.S., Z.A.C.S., A A MINOR MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., L.S.M., MOTHER : 1465 MDA 2024 IN THE INTEREST OF: No.: 2024-0071 Y.A.M., A A MINOR MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER :: 1467 MDA 2024

MEMORANDUM OPINION IN SUPPORT OF ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1925(a)(2)(ii) 1925()(2(i8) OEOF THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES RULES OF APPELLATE _APPELLATE PROCEDURE PROCEDURE AND NOW, this 6 6t" day of November, 2024, the court is in receipt receipt of Minor Children's Notice of Appeal and Concise Statement of Errors Complained Complained of Pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(a) filed on October 7, 7, 2024. The court hereby reaffirms its order entered on September 6, 2024, after aa hearing hearing to involuntarily terminate parental rights before The Honorable N.

N, Christopher Christopher Menges.

Menges. The The court determined determined it was was in in Children's best interest interest to involuntarily involuntarily terminate parental rights of Mother and the three Fathers.'

'Fathers are incarcerated and did not appeal the termination of parental rights Fathers rights.

The The court denies Minor Minor Children's assertion assertion that that the the court erred in in its its decision decision to terminate parental rights on the basis that there was insufficient evidence presented presented by York York County Office of Children, Youth Youth and Families Families to meet its burden meet its burden of proof. The court understands that Children love Mother and want to be with her.

However, However, the court court believes believes termination termination of parental parental rights be in Children's rights to be Children's best best interests interests at at this this time. time. Because Because the court has responded responded to to Mother's Mother's appeals appeals regarding regarding all four children, the court incorporates and attaches its amended opinion opinion in that that matter.

BY THE COURT,

N. CHRISTOPAP'4R CHRIST R MENGES, JUDGE

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF YORK COUNT, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORPHAN'S COURT DIVISION IN THE INTEREST OF: 1N No.: 2024-0069 Z.A.C.S., A A MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., LS.M., MOTHER : 1465 MDA 2024 IN THE INTEREST OF: No.: 2024-0070 S.A.J., A A MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER : 1466 MDA 2024 IN THE INTEREST OF: No.: 2024-0071 Y.A.M., A A MINOR

APPEAL OF: L.S.M., MOTHER 1467 1467 MDA MDA 2024 IN THE INTEREST OF: No.: 2024-0072 P.O.J., A A MINOR •• TPR APPEAL OF: L.S.M., L.SM., MOTHER : 1468 MDA MDA 2024

AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION IN_SUPPORT IN SUPPORT OF ORDE ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1925(a)(2)(ii) 1925G2Mi) OF THE THE PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF OF RULES APPELLATE PROCEDURE PROCEDURE AND NOW, this 6`' day of November, 2024, the court is in receipt receipt of Mother's Mother's Notice Notice of Appeal and and Concise Statement Statement of Errors Errors Complained Complained of of Pursuant Pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure Procedure 1925(a) I925(a) filed on October 4, 2024.

2024. The court hereby hereby

reaffirms reaffirms its September-b, its order entered on September 6, 2024, 2024, after aahearing hearing to involuntarily to involuntarily terminate parental rights before The Honorable Honorable N. Christopher Christopher Menges.

Menges. The court determined itit was in Children's best interest to involuntarily involuntarily terminate parental parental rights of Mother and the three Fathers.' FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This appeal involves Mother's four children: ten-year-old Z.A.C.S., whose father is R.R.S; R.R.S; seven-year-old Y.A.M., whose father is J.W., Jr. and; two-year-old two-year-old P.O.J. and eleven month old S.A.J., whose father is D.J.J. Parties stipulate that Mother has been involved with the York County Office of Children, Youth and Families Families ("the Agency" or "CYF") since 2017 due to concerns regarding regarding allegations allegations of Z.A.C.S.'s truancy, truancy, Mother's Mother's lack lack of housing housing and supervision, and Mother's and supervision, substance abuse and mental health issues. Stip.

Stip. (Y.A.M.), (Y.A.M.), 07/15/2024, at at ¶ 7.

Regarding Z.A.C.S.'s truancy, an initial family family service plan plan from July July 2021 noted that Child had seventy-nine absences and was forty-six forty-six days days truant. Termination (TPR) Hr'g, (TPR) 7/19/2024, Ex. Hr'g, 7/19/2024, 1, at Ex. I, at 2. Claims were 2. Claims were noted as valid noted as due to valid due to Mother Mother not not having having stable stable housing and intereet internet issues. issues. Id. Id. It It was was noted that that "Mother has resided resided with a a friend, Days Inn, Bell Shelter, and back to Days Days Inn throughout throughout the assessment." Id. Id. The The case was accepted for was accepted for services. In In January January 2022, 2022, aadependency dependency

'fathers Fathers are incarcerated and did not appeal the termination of parental rights rights. petition petition was was filed regarding regarding Z.A.C.S., but but the the petition petition was was withdrawn withdrawn the the following following month without prejudice and court supervision ended. Id. Id The The relevant relevant history began began with with aanew referral referral to the Agency on January the Agency January 3, 3, 2023, 2023, regarding allegations of regarding allegations of Mother' aban donmen tof Mother'ss abandonment oft he three the three oldest old est children. children. 2 Id. The three three oldest oldest children children were were found found in in the the Red Red Roof Roof Inn Inn without without Mother Mother being being present and with no supplies. Id. Allegations were that "there was marijuana, marijuana, crack, crack, and aascale observed in the hotel room with the children." Id. Mother was found at the the back back of the the hotel, hotel, and she could not not provide provide an explanation for an explanation for why why the illegal illegal substances and paraphernalia were in her motel room. Stip.

Stip. (Y.A.M.), (Y.A.M.),JJ 11.

II Mother was arrested and charged with Endangering Endangering the Welfare of Children and it was reported that Mother had fifteen outstanding warrants at the time. Id. Id. Mother also faced charges of Possession with Intent to Deliver, Drug Drug Paraphernalia, Paraphernalia, and Small Amount Amount of Marijuana Marijuana for Personal Personal Use.

Use. The Agency Agency had had received received seven referrals referrals regarding regarding Mother Mother for substance abuse. for substance abuse. Id., Id.,¶ 11.

IH.

The The Agency Agency filed filed an application application for emergency protective for emergency protective custody, custody, which which was was granted granted on January 3, on January 2023. Subsequently, 3, 2023. Subsequently, the the three three oldest oldest children children were were adjudicated adjudicated dependent on January 18, 2023. Parties stipulate that at the time of adjudication, adjudication, Z.A.C.S's attendance record showed: "27 record showed: "27 unlawful unlawful absences, absences, 21 tardies, 55excused 2I tardies, and 16 I6 unlawful unlawful [absences], [absences], [and] [and] 22days early dismissal." Stip.

Stip. (Z.A.C.S.), (Z.A.C.S.), $¶ 14.

Youngest child, SA.J., youngest Z S.A.J., had not been born vet yet.

The The court set the the current permanency permanency goal as return return to to parent parent or guardian guardian and and the the concurrent goal as adoption.

Regarding S.A.J., the Regarding youngest Child, S.A.J,, the Agency Agency received received aageneral general protective protective services referral for him because, after his birth on November 30, 30, 2023, 2023, Mother left the hospital with Child against medical advice on December 3, 3, 2023. Child had a a slightly raised bilirubin level which could require require treatment for jaundice jaundice if it it continued to rise. Stip.

Stip. ((S.A.J.), S.A.J.), 7/15/2024, 7/15/2024, ¶ 10. Mother tested positive positive for for marijuana two days prior to S.A.J.'s S.A.J's birth. Id. Child was removed from Mother's Mother'g care on December 5, 2023, two days after leaving leaving the hospital, hospital, and was later later adjudicated dependent on December 18, 18, 2023.

twenty Mother was provided with services pursuant to reunification but after twenty months of adjudication for the oldest three children and four months for the youngest youngest return to Mother child, retum Mother is still still not not imminent imminent and and amended amended petitions petitions to to terminate terminate parental parental rights rights were were filed filed on on May May 6, 2024 for 6, 2024 for the oldest three the oldest three children. children. A A petition petition to to terminate Mother's rights to the youngest child's was filed on April April 29, 29, 2024. A A termination of parental rights hearing was held on July July 19, I9, 2024 and September 6, September 6, 2024.

At the first day of the termination hearing, Abbie Fulton of Catholic Charities testified that the organization had opened services on January January 18, 18, 2023 and closed services unsuccessfully on April 10, 2023. There were no concerns with supervised supervised visits at that time, but Mother's progress was minimal due to such a a short short period period of of time.

Next, Ellie Williams of EquTeam EquiTeam Support Support Services testified that the the two two oldest children, Z.A.C.S. and Y.A.M. are both receiving receiving weekly weekly therapy. therapy. Ms. Williams testified that she is working with the girls girls on behaviors, behaviors, boundaries, boundaries, developmental trauma, and initially on parentification with Z.A.C.S. Tr., Tr., 7/19/2024, 7/19/2024, at 34. Ms. Williams testified that Z.A.C.S. has improve improve significantly significantly in relation to to be parentified, and she has a a healthier relationship relationship with her sister Y.A.M. Id Id. Ms. Williams testified that the girls, the two oldest children, love their mother and want to live with her, and if they cannot live with her, they they want to live with Margie Margie Morris, their kinship resource. resource. Ms. Williams had not seen the girls girls interact with Mother enough to testify regarding any bond the children may may have with her. Id., Id,, at 40. However, she was able to testify that that girls girls were bonded to their kinship kinship resource parent.

Susan Scott Program Program Director Director of of PA PA Child Child also testified testified that they they opened opened services with Mother the first time on November 13, 2023 and closed on March 7, 7, 2024 due learning of Mother's upcoming incarceration. During During those months of service, Mother's fully supervised visits were two days days per per week for two hours. hours. Ms. Scott also testified regarding the parentified behaviors of Y.A.M. and to aagreater greater extent, extent, Z.A.C.S., Z.A.C.S., who who behaves behaves more more in in a a role role of of tending tending her her younger younger siblings, siblings, rather rather

than just playing with them. Tr., Tr, 7/19/2024, at 55-57. Ms. Ms. Scott testified testified that that Z.A.C.S. often picked up the baby, P.O.J., and once tripped tripped and fell while holding holding him, raising safety concerns. Id., Id., at 55. The parentified parentified behaviors were observed in j

Mother's presence. For example, Ms. Scott testified that, during during one visit, visit, Y.A.M Y.A.M going on. Id., began screaming from the bathroom, and staff ran to see what was going Id., at 57. However, Mother told Z.A.C.S. to go check on Y.A.M. Id. Staff had to redirect redirect Mother Mother and and explain explain that that she she needed needed to to come come to to the the bathroom. bathroom. Id. Id. Ms. Ms. Scott testified that that Mother had on-going on-going attendance concerns, concerns, such as missed visits for various reasons and was placed on aaconfirmation policy policy requiring requiring her to confirm confirm her her attendance on the day of each each visit. visit. Tr., 9/6/2024, 9/6/2024, at 58. During During the first time PA Child was providing services, Mother brought gifts for brought Christmas gifts for the children and brought clothing, shoes, and toys. Id., at 74-75.

74-75. Mother did not bring bring meals or supplies, such as diapers. diapers.

After Mother's second incarceration, PA Child opened services a a second time on July 1, I, 2024, approximately two months after the filing filing of the termination petitions. Id., Id., at 59. Since opening for the second time, Ms. Scott testified that Mother's visits were decreased to once per per week for one hour. There had only only been been three visits by the second day of the termination hearing hearing and Mother had attended each. each. Id. Ms. Ms. Scott Scott testified testified that Mother Mother continued continued to bring bring snack foods foods and drinks and drinks for the children rather than aameal and supplies, such as diapers. diapers. However, However, Ms. Scott

was not sure if if Mother Mother had had ever been been told that this this was expected of her. was expected her. Id., at 72- Id., at 72 73. Ms. Ms. Scott testified that she still could not recommend going going to unsupervised unsupervised visits sits or or expanded visits because because of of the adjustment period the adjustment period needed needed for children. for the children.

Id., at 64. Ms. Scott noted that the biggest concern at this point point is making making sure that that the two girls are not stepping into parental roles with their younger brothers. Id., younger brothers. Id., at at 80.

testified. Ms. Swarr has been Next, Tanner Swarr, caseworker for the Agency testified. assigned to Mother's case since the referral in January January 2023. Ms. Tanner testified testified that that Mother is on Mother is on supervised supervised bail bail for for her her pending pending charges. charges. Tr., Tr., 7/19/2024, at 86.

7/19/2024, at 86. She She testified regarding the sporadic visitation that has occurred over the course of the the reunification period, noting Mother's many changes of address, many changes address, incarcerations, incarcerations, and and time time on the the run run in in Florida.

Florida.

BY ATTORNEY MILLER As it Q. As it relates to the relates to the mother, since the mother, since the dependency, what addresses do we have as adjudication of dependency, it it relates for for her? her?

A.

A January January 4th 4th of 2023, Red of 2023, Red Roof Roof Inn.

Inn. March March 26th 26th of of 2023, 660 West 2023, 660 West Princess Street, Unit Princess Street, Unit 1, York, I, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17401.

17401. May May 16thI6th ofof 2023 2023 reported reported toto be out of state at an unknown location. June 7th of 2023 reported during aavisit reported during visit to to her children she her children she was was in in Miami. Then on June 16th I6th of 2023 she was at 3400 Concord Road, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17404.

THE COURT: That was at York County County Prison?

THE WITNESS: WITNESS. It It is. is THE COURT: COURT: Okay. Okay Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: August 19th I9th of 2023, 921 North Pine Street, York, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania 17403.

December 5th of 2023, 415 South Court Avenue, Avenue, York, York, PA 17401. On March 6th of 2024 at York County County Prison. We were informed when she was released from prison prison and that she she is is staying at the Red Red Roof Roof Inn Inn currently. currently.

M., at 88, 89.

Id., Ms. Swarr testified that sporadic visits were sometimes because of active warrants and Mother's fear of being picked up, up, even though though the Agency Agency indicated to Mother that it does not typically notify sheriffs about warrants except except in the case of aa high crime. Id., at 93. Since the adjudications of dependency, dependency, Mother never progressed progressed to to unsupervised unsupervised or or partially partially unsupervised unsupervised visitation. visitation. Id., Id., at 92-93; Tr., at 92-93; Tr.

9/6/2024, at 55.

The Agency requested that Mother maintain safe, stable housing housing for Children; maintain employment; complete a drug and alcohol evaluation and drug a drug drug and alcohol testing to eliminate substance abuse concerns; follow through through with any any recommendations; cooperate with an in-home team and early early intervention; and have a a mental health evaluation. Mother was asked to provide provide evidence of compliance to include paystubs, a a lease, releases, etc. TPR Hr'g, 7/19/2024, Ex. 2 Hr'g, 7/19/2024,Ex. 2 11, 14, at H, 14, 16.

16. However, However, Mother Mother did not not maintain employment or housing. maintain employment housing. Mother Mother declined services with Early Intervention for P.O.J.

P.O.J, that had been court-ordered, and and the the Agency Agency had had to to step in and consent. consent. Id., Id., Ex. Ex. 3, 3, at 3. Additionally, Additionally, Mother Mother did not cooperate with drug testing. For For example, prior to the filing filing of the TPR

petition, Mother's call- in compliance rate Mother's call-in rate with since adjudication with Averhealth since adjudication was was only 3%. Tr., 7/1 9/ 2024, at 96. Mother no-showed sixty-six 7/19/2024, sixty-six times. times. Since the Since the beginning of January 2024, her call-in call- in compliance rate was 25%. Id., Id., at 44. After at 44. After the the filing of the TPR petitions and after Mother's most recent recent release from release from incarceration, her call- in compliance rate was 91 call-in 91%% in July 2024, and 92% July 2024, 92% in in August 2024.

2024. Mother Mother tested tested positive for for alcohol alcohol on five five occasions in in July July and and August 2024 and once for THC through Probation and once through Averheath in through Averheath in September September 3, 3, 2024, 2024, three three days before before the final final day day of the the termination termination hearing. hearing. Only Only as of August 25, 2024, about two weeks before the final day day of the termination termination hearing, Mother got her medical marijuana card and provided provided notice to the agency the agency the the following day. Three following day. Three weeks weeks before the last before the day of last day of the the TPR TPR hearing, hearing, Mother Mother reached reached out out to the Agency, to the after her Agency, after second incarceration, her second incarceration, and asked for and asked for aamental mental health A referral health evaluation. A referral was was made made to Hugh Hugh Smith Associates.

Associates. Ms. Ms. Swarr Swarr testified that approval is pending with insurance to complete evaluation. Tr. complete the evaluation. Tr., 7/19/2024, at 96. Likewise, regarding housing, housing, Mother testified that the day day before before the TPR hearing the TPR hearing she she received received approval approval for for a a voucher voucher that that will will provide provide her her with with rental assistance for fro a a few months. However, she still now needs to find aahome. home.

Finally, Finally, Mother Mother has has been employed full been employed full time at a time at a Starbucks Starbucks factory factory for for three three weeks weeks prior prior to the the final day of the TPR final day TPR hearing. hearing.

Mother Mother testified and then testified and then addressed addressed the the court directly at court directly the close at the close of of the the TPR TPR hearing. Mother told the court that she knew that she had made aalot of mistakes while her children were in placement, mainly mainly from being being scared. Tr., Tr,, 9/6/2024, 9/6/2024, at 89. Mother acknowledged wasting a a lot of time with being being on the run. Id., Id., at 90.

90, Mother noted the progress she has made in the weeks since release from her second incarceration incarceration and that she she has has taken care care of the jail time the jail time and and her her fines. fines.

Mother indicated that she loves her kids and is ready getting them ready to work toward getting back. back.

Although Although the court believes the court that Mother believes that Mother loves loves her her children and has children and has made made recent progress, the court noted that Mother had not made enough enough progress. progress. After twenty months twenty of dependency months of dependency for for the the three three oldest oldest children children and over ten and over ten months months for for the youngest child, Mother still has pending charges related to endangering endangering her children, children, which which may may require require aalonger longer term of separation. term of separation. Mother has not Mother has not demonstrated demonstrated the the necessary necessary stability with with missed missed visits. Mother Mother still needs needs to to complete a a mental mental health health evaluation and and any any recommendations recommendations that that may may result. result.

Mother still does not have housing, and although although she has now secured financial assistance with initial rent payments, itit is not clear to the court how long long it may may take to find appropriate housing. Meanwhile, the children's need for permanency permanency continues. The second youngest child, P.O.J., P.0.J., was adjudicated dependent at around adjudicated dependent five months old, and the baby, S.A.J., was removed from Mother's care within his

first first week week and and has only known has only known the the resource parent as resource parent as his his parental parental figure. figure. The court The court explained that its focus must be be on the best interest of the children and granted granted termination. This appeal appeal followed.

ISSUES ON APPEAL Mother's Mother's concise statement are as as follows: follows: I1. York County Office of of Children Youth and Families Families ... failed to ... failed present clear and convincing evidence that termination of of Mother's parental rights best served the physical physical and emotional needs and welfare of the minor child under 23 Pa.C.S. Pa.C.S. [$$] 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5) and (a)(8) and [ V 2511(b).

2511(a)(1). (a)02), (a)(5) and (a)(8) and [$] 2511(b) 2.2. The trial court erred in terminating Mother's parental rights to parental rights the minor child without clear and convincing convincing evidence that termination best served the physical and emotional best served emotional [] [] needs and welfare of the minor child under 23 Pa.C.S. [$$] fSs,SSJ 2511(x)(1), 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5) and (a)@2), and (a) f¢J2511(h). (8) and [$] (a)(8) 2511(b).

DISCUSSION The standard of review by the Superior Court of an appeal appeal from a a decree terminating parental rights is limited to determining determining whether the decision of the trial court is is supported by competent evidence. In re K C. W., K.C. W., 456 Pa. Super. Super. 1, I, 689 A.2d A.2d 294, 298 ((1997).

1997). Absent Absent an an abuse of discretion, an an error of law, law, or insufficient insufficient evidentiary support for the trial court's decision, the decree must stand. Id. Where a a trial court has granted a a petition to involuntarily involuntarily terminate parental parental rights, rights, the Superior Court Superior Court must must accord accord the trial judge's the trial decision the judge's decision same deference the same deference given given to to a a jury verdict. verdict. In re Child M., 452 452 Pa. Super. 230, 681 Pa. Super. 681 A.2d A.2d 793, 800 ((1996).

793, 800 1996). The The

Superior Court employs Superior Court employs aacomprehensive comprehensive review of the review of the record record to determine whether to determine whether the the trial court's court's decision decision is competent evidence. In is supported by competent In re Matsock, 416 Pa. Matsock, 416 Pa. 742 ((1992).

Super. 520, 611 A.2d 737, 742 1992). The The "[p]ermissible "[p]ermissible grounds grounds for involuntary involuntary termination of parental rights are specified in 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511," as discussed 2511," as discussed above. above. In In re re C.S., 2000 2000 Pa. Super 318, Pa. Super 318, Jj¶ 8-9,761 8-9, 761 A.2d A.2d 1197, 1197, 1199-200 1199--200 (Pa. (Pa. Super. Super. Ct. 2000).

Ct Importantly, the court Importantly, the court must only find must only one factor find one factor pursuant to 23 pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A.

Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a) 2511(a) to terminate parental to terminate rights. The parental rights. The relevant relevant 2511 251l sections sections to to Mother's Mother's appeal appeal are are as follows: follows: (a) General rule. rule. — The rights of aaparent parent in regard regard to aachild may may be terminated after a a petition filed on any any of the following following grounds: grounds: (1) The parent by conduct continuing for a (I)The a period period of at least six months immediately preceding preceding the filing filing of the petition petition either has evidenced aasettled evidenced settled purpose purpose ofof relinquishing parental claim relinquishing parental claim to to aa child or child or has has refused or failed refused or to perform failed to perform parental parental duties. duties.

(2) The repeated (2) The repeated and continued incapacity, and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect or abuse, neglect or refusal refusal of the parent has caused the child to be without essential parental parental care, control care, or subsistence control or subsistence necessary necessary for his physical for his or mental physical or mental well-being and the conditions and causes of the incapacity, incapacity, abuse, neglect abuse, neglect or or refusal cannot or refusal cannot or will not be will not be remedied remedied by the by the parent. parent.

(5) The child child has has been been removed removed from the care of thethe parent parent by by the the court or under aavoluntary agreement agreement with an ageney agency for aaperiod period of at least six months, the conditions which led to the removal or or placement placement ofof the child continue the child continue to to exist, the parent exist, the cannot or parent cannot or will not remedy those conditions within aareasonable periodperiod of time, the services or assistance reasonably reasonably available to the parent are not likely to remedy the conditions which led to the removal or placement of the child within aareasonable period period of time and termination of the parental rights rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child.

(8) The child has been removed from the care of the parent parent by by the court or under aavoluntary agreement with an agency, agency, 12 L2 months months or more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, placement, the conditions which led to the removal or placement placement of the child continue to exist and termination of parental parental rights rights would best serve the the needs needs and and welfare welfare of the the child.

(b) Other considerations. --The --The court in terminating terminating the rights rights of aa parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, parent shall give primary consideration to the developmental, physical physical and and emotional emotional needs needs and and welfare welfare of the the child.

23 Pa.C.S.A. §8$ 2511(a)(1), 2511(a)01), (2), (2) ((5), 5), and and (b). (b).

The court determined York County Children Youth and Families presented presented clear and convincing evidence to the court that termination of Mother's parental parental rights rights best served Child's emotional needs needs and and welfare welfare under under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 2511 Pa.C.S.A. $$ 2511 (a)(1), (2), (a)(D), (2), and and (8) (8) and §$ 251 l (b) of the 2511(b) the Adoption Adoption Act.

I.

I. Termination Termination of parental rights is parental rights is warranted warranted under under section section (a)(1). (a)(1).

There are clearly grounds to terminate Mother's parental rights under 23 Pa.C.S. parental rights $§2511(a)(1).

25l(a)1). Under section section (a)(1), (a)I), the moving party party in terminating terminating parental parental rights rights must show the parent, by conduct continuing for a a period period of at least six months immediately preceding the filing of the petition, either has evidenced aa settled purpose of relinquishing parental claim to aachild or has refused or failed to perform perform parental duties. 23 Pa. C.S. §$ 2511(a)(1). The focus of this subsection is on the conduct conduct of the parent. parent. In re B.L.L., B.LL., 787 A.2d A.2d 1007, 1007, 1013 1013 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2001) 2001) (citation (citation omitted). Although the six months before aa petition is filed are critical to a determination, aacourt considering termination of parental rights rights must weigh weigh the history of the case and determine if termination tennination is warranted on a a totality totality of the circumstances. In In re B., B., N.M., N.M., 856 A.2d 847, 855 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2004).

2004). A A parent parent must make a "sincere and genuine effort" to maintain aarelationship, relationship, use all available resources to preserve the bond, and resist obstacles. In re B, B., N.M., NM,, 856 A.2d 847, 847, 855 (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2004). The Supreme Court has stated: There There is no no simple or easy definition of parental parental duties. Parental duty is Parental duty is best understood in relation to the needs of aa child. A A child needs love, love, protection, protection, guidance, guidance, and support. These and support. These needs, physical physical andand emotional, cannot be met by aa merely passive interest in the development of the child. Thus, this court has held that the parental parental obligation is a a positive duty which requires affirmative performance. performance. duty ...

This affirmative duty... requires continuing interest in the child and aa genuine effort to maintain communication and association with the child. Because Because a a child child needs needs more more than than aa benefactor, benefactor, parental parental duty duty requires that a a parent parent `'exert exert himself to take and maintain a a place place of importance in the child's life.' In Interest of ofA.P., A.P, 692 A.2d 240, 245 (Pa.Super. 1997) (citing (Pa.Super. 1997) (citing In In re Burns, Burns, 379 A.2d 535 535 (Pa. (Pa. 1977)).

1977)) Analyzing 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(1) in relation to this case, it is clear from the the record record that CYF offered clear convincing evidence that Mother clear and convincing Mother has has refused or failed to perform parental duties for at least six months immediately preceding preceding the filing of the petition to terminate her parental rights to the three oldest children.

At termination, Mother had supervised visits for one hour each week, week, which never

progressed to unsupervised or partially unsupervised, unsupervised, and which had had to to be decreased be decreased due to Mother's absences from Children while on the run and during during periods periods of of incarceration. titne out of state, Incarceration. Mother's incarcerations, time state, and refusal to attend certain to attend certain example, presented visits if all the children could not be present, for example, presented aahindrance hindrance to to her her ability to perform ability to parental duties. perform parental duties. Due Due to to Mother's challenges with Mother's challenges with multiple multiple incarcerations, housing, and lack incarcerations, lack of housing, employment, Mother lack of employment, was not Mother was not able able to to provide provide either either the the physical or emotional support that emotional support needed. that Children needed.

The The court did hear hear testimony testimony that Mother Mother brought brought items for Children to visits, Children to visits, Christmas gifts, and initially attended Children's medical and dental appointments. appointments.

However, Mother stopped However, Mother stopped attending attending these these appointments, appointments, saying saying that she no that she no longer longer received notice and acknowledged that she did not inquire inquire about these appointments. appointments.

Although Although Mother Mother has has made made progress after the progress after the filing of the filing of the petition petition to terminate her to terminate her parental rights, the court must consider the totality totality of the circumstances. Mother Mother has has not addressed issues issues on on aasystematic or or regular regular basis. The The court recognizes recognizes that that Mother has has made efforts, but but they have have not not been diligent and sustained efforts. been diligent efforts. Id., Id., at 32. CYF has provided sufficient evidence under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(1) 2511(a)(1) that that Mother has failed to perform parental duties for wel wellIbeyond beyond the previous six months previous six months prior to the filing of the petition to terminate parental parental rights. rights.

I1.

II. Termination Termination of of parental parental rights rights is is warranted warranted under section (a)(2). under section (a)(2).

There There is sufficient evidence to terminate Mother's parental parental rights rights under 23 Pa.C.S. §$ 2511(a)(2).

2511(a)02). This subsection can be broken down into three elements: elements: "( 1) "(I) repeated and continued incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal; (2) incapacity, (2) such incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal has caused the child to be without essential parental parental care, care, control or subsistence necessary for his physical or mental well-being; and (3) well-being; and (3),the causes of the incapacity, abuse, neglect or refusal cannot or will not be be remedied." In re Adoption of M.E.P. ME.P. 825 A.2d 1266, 1272 1272 (Pa.Super. 2003) (citations (Pa.Super. 2003) omitted). (citations omitted).

Unlike subsection subsection (a)(1), (a(1), this subsection "emphasizes the child's present present and future need for essential parental care, control or subsistence necessary necessary for his physical physical or mental well-being." In re E.A.P., EA.P., 944 A.2d 79, 82 ((Pa.Super. Pa.Super. 2008) 2008) (citations (citations omitted). The children cannot wait for a a parent until he or she is prepared prepared to take on parental responsibilities. Id. at 83. Sincere efforts to perform perform parental parental duties can preserve the rights of aaparent under subsection subsection (a)(1) (a)(1) but may may be be insufficient as to capacity to to parent parent under (a)(2). In under subsection (a)02). In re Z.P., Z.P., 994 A.2d 1108, 1108, 1117 1117 2010) (citations (Pa.Super. 2010) (citations omitted). omitted).

In regard to 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)02) 2511(a)(2) and this case, it is clear from the record that CYF offered clear and convincing evidence that abuse, neglect neglect and refusal by by the the Mother has caused caused all four four children children to be be without without essential parental parental care care necessary for their mental well-being and the conditions and causes of the abuse, neglect and refusal will not be be remedied by by the parent. parent. The Court incorporates incorporates its summary of the the facts facts in in this this case here here and and its its answer answer under the the previous previous factor. factor. Here, Here, Mother's Mother's refusal or inability refusal or inability to comply with to comply with services, services, get get evaluations, evaluations, maintain maintain employment, maintain consistent visits, or maintain housing throughout the housing throughout the reunification period has caused the children to continue to be without without essential essential parental care for their mental and physical wellbeing. wellbeing. It is not clear to to the the Court Court that that the causes the causes of of Mother's abuse, neglect, Mother's abuse, or refusal neglect, or refusal will will be be remedied, despite Mother's remedied, despite Mother's recent recent progress progress made aver after the filing filing of the the petition petition for for termination termination and after the and after the first first day of the TPR hearing. Mother was involved with CYF from 2017 to 2022 2022 and and from from January January 2023 to present.

2023 t0 present. This This history certainly calls history certainly calls into into question question whether whether Mother Mother will be be able to remedy the conditions and causes of abuse, abuse, neglect, neglect, and refusal refusal by by Mother. Mother Mother did not not progress progress to to unsupervised visits with with Children who have been have been in in placement placement for for over twenty months, regarding regarding the oldest three. The youngest child, The youngest child, S.A.R., S.A.R., was was only in in Mother's Mother's care for for aacouple of days days out of concern for for his his medical medical well-being and has only known the resource parent parent as a parental figure. a parental figure. The court The court acknowledges that Mother's compliance is better now, after her most recent release recent release from incarceration aa few weeks prior to termination. Yet, Yet, the court also heard heard testimony during the the adjudicatory period, period, that that Mother had had numerous numerous addresses, addresses, was was incarcerated, went went on the the run run to Florida, Florida, and was incarcerated again after her return. incarcerated again return.

In In twenty twenty months, months, Mother Mother has has not not maintained consistent visits, maintained consistent employment, or visits, employment, or housing. Mother has not submitted to aamental health evaluation and had almost no

compliance with with drug and alcohol alcohol testing, until until after after the filing of the the filing termination the termination petition. Given the amount of time Mother has been receiving receiving services or has has been been involved with CYF, her minimal progress, the court remains concerned that the the causes of Mother's abuse, neglect or refusal will not be be remedied. CYF has has provided provided sufficient evidence under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(2) 2511(a)(2) that Mother's abuse, abuse, neglect neglect and refusal and refusal has caused Children has caused Children to to be without without essential essential parental parental care care necessary necessary for for their mental well-being, and the conditions and causes of the abuse, neglect, and abuse, neglect, refusal will not be remedied by by Mother.

III.

II. Termination is warranted Termination is warranted under under section section (a)(5) (a)(5) for for Mother.

Mother.

In addition, there are grounds to terminate Mother's rights rights under 23 Pa.C.S.

Pa.C.S. §$ 2511(a)(5).

2511(a)(5). This This subsection can be broken subsection can broken down down into into five elements: (() five elements: 1) the the child child has has been removed from parental care for at least six months; months; (2) (2) the conditions that led to to the child's child's removal removal or placement placement continue to to exist; exist; (3) (3) the parents parents cannot or will will not not remedy the conditions which which led led to removal removal or placement within or placement within aareasonable reasonable time; (4) period of time; (4) the the services reasonably reasonably available available to the the parents parents are unlikely unlikely to remedy the conditions which led to removal or placement placement within aareasonable period period of time; and and ((5) 5) termination of parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child. See In re M.E.P., 825 A.2d 1266, 1273-74 1273-74 ((Pa.Super. Pa.Super. 2003) 2003) (citation (citation omitted). "[O]nce "[O ]nce aachild is removed from the care of aaparent, parent, the burden is on the

parent to take action to regain parental rights." in In the interest of of B. C, 36 A.3d 601, B.C., 601, (Pa.Super. (Pa.Super. 2012) 2012) (citation (citation omitted). omitted).

Here again, the court incorporates its responses above. The three oldest children have been adjudicated dependent for more than six months. The conditions conditions that led to Children's removal, such as lack of lack of housing housing and supervision, supervision, alcohol concerns, mental health concerns, etc., remain. After twenty twenty months, months, it is not clear that Mother will be able to remedy these conditions in aareasonable time.

Although Although Mother Mother now now has has a a housing housing voucher, she still voucher, she still has has to to find find suitable suitable housing housing for for herself and four four children. Mother Mother still still has comply with has to comply with aa mental health health evaluation for which an intake had not been done at the time of termination and comply comply with any recommendations. with any recommendations. Additionally, Mother still Additionally, Mother still has has pending charges, pending charges, and depending on the outcome, Mother Mother- may need to complete complete a a threat of harm evaluation and work toward any recommendations. It is likewise not clear to the court that the services available to Mother are likely likely to remedy remedy the conditions within aareasonable reasonable time. time. The court court notes notes that that even with with the the services, services, Mother Mother has yet has not yet progressed to having any unsupervised or partially partially unsupervised unsupervised visits with her children. Mother's absences necessitated aaperiod of adjustment children. adjustment to allow Children time to transition. For example, with the resumption of visits upon upon mother's second release from incarceration, P.Q.J.

P.OJ, initially initially cried and did not want to leave the resource parent. Tr., 7/1 9/ 2024, at 64-65. Additionally, 7/19/2024, Additionally, the resource parents parents reported reported that after the resumption of visits, P.O.J.

P.O.J. has started hitting hitting after visits, visits, was was agitated, agitated, and was not able to fall asleep. Tr., 9/6/2024, at 56. Various issues were were identified identifie when when Mother Mother was accepted accepted for for services in in the the past. past. Years Years later, later, issues such as issues such as lack lack of housing have persisted. have persisted.

Termination serves the needs and welfare of Children who need permanency, permanency, stability, and support. For example, Z.A.C.S, whose truancy caused her truancy issues caused her to to be be behind behind in in her her classwork, necessitating that that she she attend summer school school in order to in order to be be year. Tr, promoted to the first grade, made the honor roll last year. Tr,, 9/6/2024, 9/6/2024, at 33-34,; 33-34.; TPR Hr'g, 7/19/2024, Ex. 1 I at 2. Additionally, Additionally, she has improved improved in her her parentified parentified behaviors, interacting with her siblings more as an older sibling sibling rather than a a parent. parent.

Both girls continue to receive weekly therapy. Child, P.O.J., therapy. Child, P.0.J., continues to receive continues to receive occupational and physical therapy through Early Intervention in the resource home, home, and S.A.J. is involved with Early Intervention as well. All of the children children are are doing doing well well and and have their needs needs met met with with their their resource resource families who also make sure that make sure that the children have visits with their siblings. siblings.

III. Termination of parental rights is warranted under 23 Pa.C.S.A PA.CS.A 2511 (g) (8) Once Once the the child child has has been been removed removed from from the the care care of of the the parent, parent, the the burden burden is on the is on the parent to take action to regain parental rights. See In re Z.P., 2010 PA Super Super 56, 56, 994 994 A.2d 1108, 1118-19 1118-19 (Pa. 2010) (holding (Pa. Super. 2010) (holding that parental parental obligation obligation is aapositive positive duty which requires affirmative performance). We do not permit parental inertia permit parental inertia to to toll the permanency toll the permanency needs of the needs of the Child.

Child. In In re re N.M.B., 2004 PA N.M.B., 2004 Super 311, PA Super 311, 856 A.2d A.2d 847, 856 (Pa. 2004) ("[A] (Pa. Super. 2004) ("[A] parent's basic constitutional right right to the custody custody and rearing of his or her child is converted, upon upon the failure to fulfill his his or or her her parental parental duties, to the child's right to to have have proper proper parenting parenting and fulfillment of his his or her potential in a environment. "). Although a permanent, healthy, safe environment."). Although aaparent parent has hes cooperated with CYS in providing the necessary necessary releases, releases, when the fact remains remains that that the parent's mental and emotional issues, which require require additional treatment, treatment, remained unaddressed at the time of the termination hearing, hearing, the issues that lead to placement placement continue to to exist. In In the Interest of B.C., Interest of B. 36 A.3d A.3d 601, 601, 609-610, 609-610, 2012 2012 Pa. Pa. * 18, 2012 PA Super Super. LEXIS 7, 18, Super 7.

When When examining claims in examining claims in relation relation to to Section 2511(a)(8), the Section 2511(a(8), the court court follows follows established case law. In order to demonstrate that termination is proper proper pursuant pursuant to Section 2511(a)(8), CYS must prove by clear and convincing convincing evidence that: ((1) 1) the child has been removed from the care of the parent parent for at least twelve months; months; (2) (2) the conditions that led to the removal or placement placement of the child continue to exist; exist; and (3) termination of parental (3)termination parental rights rights would would best best serve serve the the needs needs and welfare welfare of the child.

In In re C.L.G., CL.G., 2008 2008 PA PA Super 198, 198, 956 A.2d A.2d 999, 999, 1005 1005 (Pa. Super. 2008). (Pa. Super. 2008) Termination under Section 2511(a)(8) 2511(a(8) does not require require the court to evaluate aa parent's current willingness or ability to remedy the conditions that initially initially caused placement or the availability or efficacy of CYF services. In re D.A. T., 91 A.3d 197, D.A.T., 197,

205, 2014 Pa. Super. LEXIS 228, *19, 19, 2014 PA Super 86, 2014 WL 1687812.

Super 86, 1687812.

Where a a parent has addressed some of the conditions that led to a a child's removal, removal, but other conditions still exist, this element may be deemed to be satisfied. See See In re In re C.L.G., 2008 PA Super 198, 956 A.2d CL.G., A.24 999, 1005 1005 (Pa. (Pa. Super. Super. 2008) 2008) (en (en banc). bane).

Under 23 Pa.C.S.A.

Pa.C.S.A. §§ 2511(a)(8), l (a)(8), it is clear from the record that CYF offered offered clear and convincing evidence that the three oldest children have been removed from from the care of of the the parent parent by the court or under under a a voluntary agreement with an voluntary agreement agency, an agency, twelve months or more have elapsed from the date of removal or placement, placement, the the conditions which led to the removal or placement placement of the child continue to exist, exist, and and termination of parental rights would best serve the needs and welfare of the child.

The three oldest children were adjudicated dependent dependent on January 18, 2023; January I8, 2023; therefore, more than twelve months have elapsed elapsed since the Children were removed removed from the care of Mother.

Mother. The court incorporates its summary summary of the facts and answers answers above regarding the continued existence of conditions that led to removal. The court stresses again that, at this time, termination would serve Children's needs and and welfare. Although, Mother has made progress in the weeks leading leading to termination, termination, such as securing employment, signing up for a a housing housing voucher, voucher, requesting requesting aamental mental health evaluation, securing aamedical marijuana marijuana card, and improving improving her call-in rate rate with alcohol alcohol and drug testing, the the court may not not consider consider these these late late efforts under under this this factor. Mother has never progressed to unsupervised visits, and the three oldest

twenty months. The children children have already been dependent for twenty children have have aa wonderful parental bond with the resource parents, parents, and termination would best serve would best serve Children's needs and welfare at this time, as will be discussed below. Mother has Mother has not been been able to provide physical, or emotional needs. provide for Children's developmental, physical, needs.

Child's needs are being met by by the resource parents. parents.

CYF has provided sufficient evidence under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(8) 2511(a)(8) that that Child has has been been removed removed from from the the care of the the Mother Mother by by the court or under under a a elapsed from the voluntary agreement with an agency, twelve months or more have elapsed the date of removal or placement, the conditions which led to the removal or placement placement of the child continue to exist, and termination of parental parental rights rights would best serve the the needs and welfare of the child.

1V.

IV. Termination of parental rights Child. rights is in the best interests of Chit, A A court must give primary consideration consideration "to the developmental, developmental, physical physical and emotional needs and welfare of the child." 23 Pa.C.S. §$ 2511(b).

2511(b). "Intangibles "Intangibles such as love, comfort, security, and stability are involved in the inquiry inquiry into needs and welfare of the child." In C.M.S., 884 A.2d 1284, 1287 In re CM.S., 1287 ((Pa.Super. Pa.Super. 2005).

2005). The bond between parent between and child parent and child must must be examined, to be examined, determine if to determine if termination would termination would destroy an existing, necessary, and beneficial relationship. relationship. In re N.A.M., N.A.M., 33 A.3d 95, 95, (Pa.Super. 2011)1) (quoting (Pa.Super. 201 (quoting In re T.B.B., 825 A.2d 387 TB.B.,825 387 (Pa.Super. 2003)). A (Pa.Super. 2003)). A child has the right to care in a a permanent, healthy, healthy, safe environment. See In re K.M., K.M,, 53

23 A.2d 781, 792 (Pa.Super. 2012) (citing (Pa.Super. 2012) (citing in In re re Adoption of R.J.S., Adoption of 901 A.2d R.JS., 901 at 507).

A.2d at 507). "[T]he mere existence of a a bond or attachment of aa child to aa parent will not parent will not necessarily result necessarily result in the denial in the denial of of aa termination termination petition ... courts petition ... courts considering considering termination must also consider whether the children are in aapre-adoptive pre-adoptive home and home and whether they whether they have have aabond bond with with their their foster foster parents." parents." In In re re T.S.M., 71 A.3d TS.M., 71 251, 267- A.3d 251,267- (Pa.Super. 2013) (citations (Pa.Super. 2013) Additionally, appellate (citations omitted). Additionally, have stated appellate courts have stated that that the the trial trial court should consider consider the the importance continuity of importance of continuity of relationships relationships and and effects whether any existing parent-child bond can be severed without detrimental effects on on the child.

The trial court is is not not required required by by statute precedent to statute or precedent to order that a a formal formal bonding evaluation be performed by an expert. expert. In In re K.K.R.-S., K.K.RR.-S., 2008 PA Super 231, Super 231, 958 A.2d 529, 533 (Pa. (Pa. Super. 2008). There are some instances where direct direct observation of observation of the the interaction interaction between the parent between the and the parent and the child child is is not not necessary necessary and and may may even even be be detrimental detrimental to to the the child. Id., 946 A.2d explained that, A.2d at 762. This Court explained that in cases where there is no evidence of any bond between the parent parent and child, child, it is reasonable reasonable to to infer infer that that no no bond exists. Id. bond exists. Id. at at 763.

763, As As stated stated in the statute: in the statute: The The court court in in terminating the rights terminating the of aaparent rights of parent shall shall give primary consideration to the developmental, physical physical and emotional needs needs and and welfare welfare of the child. of the child. The The rights rights of of aaparent shall not parent shall not be be terminated terminated solely on the solely on the basis basis of environmental factors of environmental factors such such as as inadequate inadequate housing, housing, furnishings, income, clothing furnishings, income, clothing

and medical care if found to be beyond the control of the parent. parent. With respect to any respect to any petition filed pursuant to subsection subsection (a)(1), (6) or (8), (6) or (8), the court shall not consider any efforts by the parent to remedy the conditions described therein which are first first initiated subsequent to the giving of notice of the filing filing of the petition. petition.

In 2023, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued aaruling ruling that clarified for for Pennsylvania trial courts that determinations of whether involuntary' involuntary termination termination meets a a child's needs and welfare requires aamulti- factor analysis multi-factor analysis that cannot be limited to merely whether a a parent-child bond exists that would be adverse to to terminate. The Court explains that the multi-factor needs and welfare analysis analysis in in termination-of-parental-rights cases requires applying "necessary and beneficial" applying a "necessary standard in considering the parent-child bond as one of those factors.

"But But aacourt conducting the Section 2511(b) needs and welfare analysis analysis must consider more must consider more than than proof proof of an adverse of an adverse or or detrimental detrimental impact from impact from severance severance of the parental parental bond. WeWe emphasize analysis of the parental emphasize analysis parental bond is but one part of the overall subsection (b) (b) analysis, which analysis, includes aa determination of whether the bond is necessary necessary and beneficial to the child, i.e., whether maintaining maintaining the bond serves the child's child's developmental, physical, physical, and emotional emotional needs and welfare. welfare.

The The Section 2511(b) inquiry inquiry must must also also include include consideration of other important factors such as: the child's need for permanency length permanency and length care ... ; whether the child is in a of time in foster care...; a pre[-] adoptive home pre[-]adoptive and bonded with foster parents; and whether the foster home meets the child's child's developmental, developmental, physical, physical, and emotional needs, and emotional needs, including including stability .... intangible needs of love, comfort, security, safety, and stability...

The court must not truncate its analysis and preclude preclude severance based solely on evidence of anan "adverse" or or "detrimental" impact impact to the child.

Therefore, to grant termination when a a parental parental bond exists, there must

be clear and convincing evidence that the bond is not necessary necessary and and beneficial.

As we have explained, "an emotional bond" with aaparent parent is legally legally insufficient to preclude insufficient to preclude termination termination ofof parental parental rights rights without without detennining whether such bond is necessary determining necessary and beneficial to the child and weighing weighing the other factors factors present present in in the the record. record. Likewise, Likewise, an "adverse effect" or "detrimental impact" of severance alone cannot demonstrate aanecessary necessary and beneficial bond.

In the Interest ofK. T., 296 A.3d 1085, 1105, 1113-15 K.T., 1113-15 (Pa. (Pa. 2023) 2023) In analyzing this case under 23 Pa.C.S.A.

Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(b), it is clear from the record that CYF offered clear and convincing evidence that the developmental, developmental, physical, physical, and emotional needs needs and welfare of of Children is is best served by by terminating terminating parental parental rights. Regarding Children's bond, the court heard testimony testimony that the two oldest children have aawonderful and healthy relationship with Margie Margie Morris, Morris, their kinship kinship placement and that aapre- adoptive resource has been identified. Tr., pre-adoptive Tr., 7/19/2024, 7/19/2024, at 46-47; Tr., 9/6/2024, at 17, 36. The resource parent provides support. provides comfort and support.

The girls are old enough to know Mother and they they have expressed expressed their desire to live with with her as as their first first choice. However, However, Caseworker Swarr Swarr testified that that Z.A.C.S.'s Z.A.CS.'$ bond bond with with Mother Mother is is not healthy healthy due to to the parentifrcation parentification issue and and that Y.A.M.

Y.A.M. has has aafamiliar bond, knowing who Mother is, but the relationship relationship is not parental. parental. Tr., Tr., 9/6/2024, at 14-15. The caseworker also reported that P.O.J.'s P.O.J's bond with Mother is familiar but not parental and noted that after recent visits, he's been defiant, defiant, hitting, hitting, and spitting. Id., at 15. The caseworker also testified that S.A.J. does not have a a

parental bond with Mother. Child is only about ten months old and has never lived parents who are with Mother. Id. The youngest children are bonded to their resource parents their their pre-adoptive pre-adoptive resource. resource. Id., at 18, Id., at 18, 36; 36; Permanency Permanency Review Review Hr'g, Hr'g, ((P.0.J.), P.O.J.), 5/29/2024, at 3.

Maintaining the bond Maintaining the does not bond does serve the not serve Children's developmental, the Children's developmental, physical, physical, and emotional needs. Unfortunately, the nature of Mother's instability instability with employment, housing, sporadic visits, visits, mental mental health concerns, etc., health concerns, etc., impact impact the the Children's developmental, physical, and emotional needs. Since January January 18, I8, 2023, 2023, and February February 18, I8, 2023, 2023, Children's Children's needs needs have have been and and are being being addressed addressed by by the the resource families with whom Children are bonded. Z.A.C.S.'s improvement improvement in parentitication is aa prime example. Z.A.C.S.'s and Y.A.M.'s school and with parentification therapist, therapist, Ellie Ellie Williams, Williams, testified testified that termination termination of parental parental rights rights would not not cause the children emotional the children emotional harm or long-term harm or long-term negative negative impact. impact. Tr., Tr., 7/19/2024, at 38-39.

7/19/2024, at 38-39.

Ms. Williams testified that it would be aadifficult process, process, but that it it could be worked

through with with appropriate therapeutic support, which her her services services would would provide. provide. Id. Id. Resource Resource parents parents meet meet Children's Children's intangible intangible needs needs for for love, love, comfort, comfort, safety, safety, and stability, as well as, their physical physical and developmental developmental needs needs related related schooling, schooling, therapy, therapy, Early Early Intervention, etc. Although Intervention, etc. Although the the oldest oldest children children have have aa bond bond or or relationship with Mother, there is clear and convincing convincing evidence on the record that the the bond is is not not necessary necessary and beneficial to to Children. The three three oldest children have have

been in placement for over twenty months as of the date that termination of of parental parental rights was granted. All the Children's need for permanency permanency is paramount paramount at this this time. time.

CYF has provided clear and convincing evidence under 23 Pa.C.S.A.

Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(b) that 2511(b) that the parental bond in this case is not necessary and beneficial to Child. The court also also notes notes that the the guardian guardian ad litem for all four four children children testified testified that they are all that they all thriving thriving in in their current current placements terminating Mother's placements and that terminating Mother's parental parental rights is rights is appropriate at this time. Tr., 9/6/2024, 9/6/2024, at at 87-88.

87-88.

convincing evidence that termination In summary, CYF provided clear and convincing best served Children's emotional needs needs and welfare welfare under under 23 Pa.C.S.A.

Pa.C.S.A. §$ 2511(a)(1), 2511(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(8) (a)(2), and (a(8) and under under §$ 2511(b). Therefore, the Court did not err in in finding finding that Mother's Mother's conduct met met at at least least one of the grounds grounds for termination under under the the statute. statute.

In this case, the court notes Mother's efforts and her current progress progress and does not doubt that she loves Children and hopes to provide for them. However, in reviewing termination of parental rights, the Superior Court has stated that "[t]he "[t]he court cannot and will not subordinate indefinitely indefinitely aachild's need for permanence permanence and stability to to aaparent's parent's claims of of progress progress and hope hope for the future." future." In In re re Adoption of Adoption of R.J.S., 2006 Pa. Super R.JS., 2006 Super 127, 127,$¶ 29, 29, 901 A.2d A.2d 502, 513 (Pa. 502, 513 Super. Ct. (Pa. Super Ct. 2006). The count 2006). The court believes that termination is in Child best interest at this time.

CONCLUSION After review of the record and for the foregoing foregoing reasons, reasons, the court hereby hereby reaffirms its order terminating Mother's parental rights rights entered on September September 6, 6, 2024.

BY THE COURT,

N. CHRISTOPjjtR 'R MENGES, JUDGE MENGES, JUDGE