In re Rachelle L-B.

Syllabus

The respondent biological father appealed from a Family Court decree terminating his parental rights to his daughter. He maintained that the decree should be vacated because the trial justice erred in finding that he was unfit to parent his daughter, that the Department of Children, Youth, and Families made reasonable efforts to achieve reunification, and that it was in the child's best interest to terminate his parental rights. <br><br><br>The Supreme Court determined that the trial justice did not err in finding parental unfitness due to the respondent's failure to cooperate with case plans developed by DCYF, which included requiring the respondent to maintain a substance-free lifestyle and provide for his daughter's basic needs, effectively parent her, and maximize her school preparedness. The Supreme Court determined that DCYF made numerous referrals and set up services to assist the respondent with substance-abuse treatment, parenting, and the child's cognitive development but, despite DCYF's efforts, respondent willfully ignored the Family Court's order to undergo a substance-abuse evaluation and had little involvement or interest in the services DCYF attempted to put into place to assist with parenting.<br><br><br>Accordingly, the Supreme Court held that there was legally competent evidence to support the trial justice's finding regarding the reasonableness of DCYF's reunification efforts, by clear and convincing evidence. Finally, the Court determined that the decision of the Family Court to terminate the respondent's parental rights was in the best interest of the child, who had bonded with her foster family. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the decree of the Family Court.