Heather Nicole Arthur v. Campbell County Department of Social Services

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Elder, Felton and Senior Judge Willis
HEATHER NICOLE ARTHUR
MEMORANDUM OPINION*
v. Record No. 2186-05-3 PER CURIAM
FEBRUARY 7, 2006
CAMPBELL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
SOCIAL SERVICES
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CAMPBELL COUNTY
Von L. Piersall, Jr., Judge Designate
(Curtis L. Thornhill; Berger & Thornhill, on brief), for appellant.
(David W. Shreve, County Attorney; George W. Nolley, Guardian
ad litem for the infant child, on brief), for appellee.
Heather Nicole Arthur appeals from the trial court’s decision terminating her residual
parental rights to J.A., her minor son, pursuant to Code § 16.1-283(B) and (C). Arthur contends the
evidence was insufficient to prove it was in the best interest of J.A. to terminate her rights and was
insufficient to prove the neglect or abuse suffered by J.A. presented a serious threat to his life, health
or development. Arthur also contends she substantially corrected the conditions that led to the
removal of J.A. Upon reviewing the record and briefs of the parties, we conclude this appeal is
without merit. Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
BACKGROUND
We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below and grant
to it all reasonable inferences fairly deducible therefrom. See Logan v. Fairfax County Dep’t of
Human Dev., 13 Va. App. 123, 128, 409 S.E.2d 460, 462 (1991). So viewed, the evidence
*
Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
proved that Arthur had a troubled childhood and in 1999 she was placed in the care of Campbell
County Department of Social Services (DSS) at thirteen years of age as a result of being expelled
from school, running away, and using drugs. When Arthur came into the custody of DSS, she
had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, ADHD, and conduct disorder. Arthur received
psychiatric, psychological, educational, and therapeutic services while in the care of DSS. In
2001, Arthur was hospitalized for paranoia and delusions. After she was discharged, Arthur
returned to her foster home, but a short time later she was charged with grand larceny and placed
in a detention home. Due to aggression problems and concerns with her sexual promiscuity,
Arthur was again hospitalized. After Arthur was discharged, she resided at a residential
treatment center. Arthur ran away from the center and was committed to the Department of
Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Upon her release from DJJ in November 2002, Arthur returned to live
with her mother, and DSS provided home-based services. On December 12, 2002, Arthur ran
away from her mother’s house and left a suicide note. Arthur was apprehended by the police and
was again hospitalized. On January 10, 2003, Arthur was admitted to another residential
treatment center (the Pines) in southeastern Virginia. Arthur ran away from the center on March
19, 2003, and was seen getting into a car in Virginia Beach. A few days later, the police
apprehended Arthur in Campbell County and she was again hospitalized. Arthur admitted using
drugs while on the run, having sexual intercourse with men to get back to Campbell County, and
staying with a man named Randall Moseley for several days. After she was released from the
hospital, Arthur returned to the Pines, and in April 2003 she informed her social worker that she
was pregnant. Arthur argued with her peers at the Pines, and she thought people were
threatening to kill her and her unborn child. Due to her problems at the Pines, Arthur moved to
Alpha House, a group home for pregnant teens and teen mothers in Petersburg. While at Alpha
House, Arthur attended parenting classes, and received prenatal and counseling services;
-2-
however, she failed to follow doctor’s orders, failed to take prescribed medication, failed to
follow the rules of Alpha House, and was belligerent.
On November 24, 2003, J.A. was born and DSS removed J.A. from Arthur’s custody at
birth, but permitted him to live with her at Alpha House. The initial foster care service plan was
to return J.A. to Arthur. After J.A.’s birth, Arthur was required to complete a psychological
evaluation. Dr. Richard Bowers completed the evaluation in February 2004. Dr. Bowers
diagnosed Arthur with anti-social personality disorder, and based upon her past behaviors,
including her relationships with men, he did not believe Arthur could “turn around.” While at
Alpha House, Arthur screamed at J.A., carried boiling water while holding J.A., and acted
obsessively toward J.A. Alpha House staff were also concerned that Moseley, J.A.’s father,
would take J.A. from Alpha House. On February 3, 2004, DSS removed J.A. from Alpha House,
and on February 25, 2004, Arthur voluntarily left Alpha House. Arthur’s discharge summary
from Alpha House recommended that she not be left unattended with any child.
After Arthur left Alpha House, she resided in Campbell County and her social worker
referred her case to Comprehensive Family Services (CFS), an agency that provides home-based
services to families, parenting services, assistance with visitation, and anger management
counseling. CFS also arranged for counseling for Arthur with Jane Neilson at the Alliance for
Families and Children. Arthur completed anger management classes, parenting classes, and
classes on appropriate behavior during visitation. Arthur was inconsistent with her therapy with
Neilson and did not have stable employment. DSS was also concerned with Arthur’s
relationships with Moseley, and another man, Shawn Jenkins.
Dr. William Whelan, a clinical psychologist and co-director of a Child-Parent
Attachment Clinic, evaluated Arthur and J.A. when J.A. was five months old. Dr. Whelan was
concerned with Arthur’s history of running away, her history of high risk self-soothing
-3-
behaviors, and her difficulty in participating in treatment regimens. In Dr. Whelan’s opinion,
Arthur would not be able to meet J.A.’s needs. On November 8, 2004, Dr. James Anderson, a
clinical psychologist, evaluated Arthur. Dr. Anderson found that Arthur had a narcissistic and
histrionic personality makeup. Dr. Anderson was concerned that Arthur would be unable to put
the needs and feelings of a child ahead of her own desires for attention and affection and that
Arthur was unable to protect herself and her child from negative and destructive relationships.
Dr. Anderson found that Arthur needed continued mental health counseling, help with practical
aspects of independent living, and help with managing a household.
On November 19, 2004, Michelle Smith, a CASA Volunteer, was at Arthur’s home
during a visitation with J.A. J.A. was approximately one year old and beginning to walk. Smith
noticed candles burning in the home, and Smith asked Arthur about the candles. Arthur stated
she knew the candles were burning, but J.A. knew the candles were hot and he would not touch
them.
On November 22, 2004, DSS changed the goal for J.A. to adoption. At approximately
the same time, Arthur confirmed to her social worker that she was pregnant and Jenkins was the
father. Later, DSS learned that Jenkins assaulted Arthur while she was pregnant. Arthur’s
second child was born in May 2005. After Arthur’s second child was born, the police responded
to an altercation at Jenkins’ home. Arthur and Jenkins filed cross-warrants against each other,
which were taken under advisement for one year and the court ordered Arthur to be on good
behavior. Approximately one week prior to the termination hearing, Arthur went to Jenkins’
house during the early morning hours to try to build a relationship with him and they had sexual
relations; however, later they had a physical altercation and the police responded. Arthur’s
second child was present during this altercation. Arthur was not employed at the time of the
termination hearing, and she admitted she had been terminated from her job at Wal-Mart for
-4-
failing to show up for work. Arthur had not obtained her GED at the time of the termination
hearing.
Susan Shutt, a case manager for the teen parenting program at the Alliance for Families
and Children, met Arthur in October 2004 when she was pregnant with her second child. Shutt
testified Arthur left the program in February 2005.
Lisa Garwacke, a mentor with the CFS, worked with Arthur from August 2004 through
December 2004. Garwacke assisted Arthur with visitations with J.A. and testified Arthur was
responsive to her assistance. Garwacke testified she talked with Arthur about healthy
relationships with men. Garwacke admitted she was not aware Arthur was involved with
domestic altercations with Jenkins on October 30, 2004 and November 28, 2004.
Rachael Kreh, an employee of Central Virginia Community Services, worked with
Arthur in a parenting program in March 2005. Kreh had four one-hour home visits with Arthur.
Kreh testified she did not notice any problems or concerns with Arthur. Kreh admitted Arthur
revoked her permission allowing Kreh to speak to DSS about Arthur’s case. Kreh admitted she
had insufficient information to form an opinion regarding Arthur’s suitability to parent J.A.
ANALYSIS
Code § 16.1-283(B) requires proof, by clear and convincing evidence that “[t]he neglect
or abuse suffered by such child presented a serious and substantial threat to his life, health or
development” and “[i]t is not reasonably likely that the conditions which resulted in such neglect
or abuse can be substantially corrected or eliminated so as to allow the child’s safe return to his
parent or parents within a reasonable period of time.”
Code § 16.1-283(C)(2) requires proof, by clear and convincing evidence that (a) the
termination is in the best interests of the child, (b) “reasonable and appropriate” services have
been offered to help the parent “remedy substantially the conditions which led to or required
-5-
continuation of the child’s foster care placement,” and, (c) despite those services, the parent has
failed, “without good cause,” to remedy those conditions “within a reasonable amount of time
not to exceed twelve months from the date the child was placed in foster care.”
“The trial court’s judgment, ‘when based on evidence heard ore tenus, will not be
disturbed on appeal, unless plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.’” Logan, 13
Va. App. at 128, 409 S.E.2d at 463 (citation omitted).
In this case, clear and convincing evidence proved the neglect or abuse suffered by J.A.
presented a serious threat to his life, health or development, Arthur failed to remedy the conditions
that led to the placement of J.A. into foster care, and it was in J.A.’s best interest to terminate
Arthur’s residual parental rights.
From the age of thirteen, Arthur received numerous inpatient and outpatient rehabilitative
services. Arthur resided in three residential treatment facilities, but she failed to follow the rules
of the facilities and ran away from two of the facilities. Arthur’s discharge summary from the
last residential facility recommended that she not be left alone with any child. While she was in
the custody of DSS, Arthur was hospitalized several times at an adolescent psychiatric center.
Arthur was diagnosed with a narcissistic and histrionic personality makeup. Based upon
Arthur’s history of running away, her history of high risk self-soothing behaviors, and her
difficulty in participating in treatment regimens, Dr. Whelan did not believe Arthur would be
able to meet J.A.’s needs. Due to Arthur’s personality makeup, Dr. Anderson did not believe
Arthur would be able to put the needs and feelings of a child ahead of her own desires for
attention and affection. Dr. Anderson also did not believe Arthur would be able to protect
herself and her child from negative and destructive relationships. Based upon her past behaviors,
including her relationships with men, Dr. Bowers did not believe Arthur could “turn around.”
When Arthur was pregnant with her second child, she admitted Jenkins, the father of the child,
-6-
hit her. As the result of a domestic disturbance with Jenkins, Arthur was required to be on good
behavior. One week prior to the termination hearing, Arthur took her second child to Jenkins’
home in the early morning hours, and had sexual relations with him; however, later they had a
physical altercation and the police responded. Despite counseling and therapy, Arthur continued
to put her own safety and the safety of a child at risk, which was consistent with the opinions of
Drs. Whelan, Anderson, and Bowers. Arthur’s conduct spanned J.A.’s entire life, despite the
best efforts and substantial resources of DSS to assist and redirect Arthur in her behavior and
parenting skills. “The [termination] statute clearly contemplates that efforts to resolve the
‘conditions’ relevant to termination are constrained by time.” Lecky v. Reed, 20 Va. App. 306,
312, 456 S.E.2d 538, 540 (1995) (citation omitted). “It is clearly not in the best interests of a
child to spend a lengthy period of time waiting to find out when, or even if, a parent will be
capable of resuming his responsibilities.” Kaywood v. Halifax County Dep’t of Soc. Serv., 10
Va. App. 535, 540, 394 S.E.2d 492, 495 (1990).
The record supports the trial court’s finding that DSS presented clear and convincing
evidence satisfying the statutory requirements of Code § 16.1-283(B) and (C)(2) and establishing
that the termination of appellant’s residual parental rights was in J.A.’s best interest.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27.
Affirmed.
-7-