In re E.J.

Citations

• 2023 Ohio 1376

Syllabus

Permanent custody motion for legal custody clear and convincing evidence abuse of discretion. The trial court's decision terminating appellant's parental rights was supported by clear and convincing evidence. The child could not be placed with appellant within a reasonable time or should not be placed with appellant. The appellant failed to remedy the conditions that led to the child's removal. The appellant was not successful in her case plan goals for substance abuse, mental health, or parenting. The record does not demonstrate that the appellant's self-medication with marijuana helped her with her mental health issues. The trial court's determination that permanent custody was in the best interest of the child was not an abuse of discretion. The child was bonded and doing well with the foster family, the only family the child has known. The GAL was of the opinion that removing the child from the foster family would be \catastrophic.\ The trial court's denial of appellant's motion for legal custody to grandmother was not an abuse of discretion. The record demonstrates that grandmother did not demonstrate full commitment to the child's needs. Further, her plans to keep the child safe were undeveloped and unrealistic. Because the juvenile court did not explicitly or solely base its decision to terminate appellant's parental rights on her mental health, there was no error in rendering its decision without the aid of expert testimony. Implied in the juvenile court's dependency adjudication was an implicit finding of parent unsuitability, and therefore, there was no requirement of the juvenile court to make a separate unsuitability finding.