NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES v. T.B.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-6430-04T46430-04T4

NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF YOUTH

AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

T.B.,

Defendant-Appellant.

IMO GUARDIANSHIP OF M.B., T.B.,

A.B. and A.E.,

Minors.

________________________________________________________

 

Submitted May 15, 2006 - Decided May 24, 2006

Before Judges C.S. Fisher and Yannotti.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Essex County, Docket No. FG-07-261-04.

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney for appellant (Christine B. Mowry, Designated Counsel, on the brief).

Zulima V. Farber, Attorney General, for respondent (Susan Brown-Peitz, Deputy Attor-ney General, of counsel and on the brief).

Yvonne Smith Segars, Public Defender, attorney for minor children (Jeffrey R. Jablonski, Designated Counsel, Law Guardian, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Defendant T.B. (defendant) is the mother of four children whose interests are at stake in this parental termination action. This action, brought by the Division of Youth and Family Services (Division), originally involved only three of defendant's children: M.B. (born May 8, 1995), T.B. (born April 29, 1997), and A.B. (born June 16, 1998). The complaint was later amended when defendant gave birth to another child, A.E., on November 28, 2003. Following a trial, the judge terminated defendant's parental rights to these four children. We affirm because the judge applied the correct legal principles and because there is ample evidence in the record to support the judge's findings.

The Division had previous involvement with defendant. In 1995, the Division received a referral, later determined to be unfounded, that defendant was heard yelling and beating M.B. Other referrals included a claim, to which there appears to have been substance, regarding C.B.D.B., who was found to have numerous fractured bones.

The present action was commenced when a Division worker found that defendant had left M.B., T.B. and A.B. in the care of C.F., the biological father of M.B. and T.B. This circumstance alarmed the Division, and caused it to conclude that defendant had placed the children in jeopardy, because C.F. had a prior criminal history, including a conviction for having sexual intercourse with a fourteen-year old. In addition, the record included evidence that defendant has "a very high potential to physically abuse her children," that she demonstrated her parental irresponsibility by denying to the Division her latest pregnancy, which led to A.E.'s birth, and that defendant "disappeared from the Division's radar screen and was missing" for three months at the end of 2003.

The record indicates that defendant was arrested for various drug offenses in March 2004; that she failed to appear for a court appearance and was incarcerated as a result; that defendant eventually pled guilty to those drug charges; that she was arrested in September 2004 on other drug charges; and that, as a result, defendant was again incarcerated, this last time for approximately two months.

The evidence demonstrated that, when not incarcerated, defendant was living in deplorable conditions. Defendant also had essentially no visits with M.B., T.B., and A.B. for close to fifteen months at one point in the history of this matter, and has almost never been employed during the last 10 years.

As a result of this and other evidence, the Division sought the termination of defendant's parental rights. On June 8, 2005, following a seven-day trial, Judge R. Benjamin Cohen rendered an oral decision and entered a judgment that terminated defendant's parental rights to the four children.

In reaching that determination, Judge Cohen correctly applied N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1, which mandates that, in order to terminate parental rights, the Division is required to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that:

(1) The child's health and development have been or will continue to be endangered by the parental relationship;

(2) The parent is unwilling or unable to eliminate the harm facing the child or is unable or unwilling to provide a safe and stable home for the child and the delay of permanent placement will add to the harm;

(3) The division has made reasonable efforts to provide services to help the parent correct the circumstances which led to the child's placement outside the home and the court has considered alternatives to termination of parental rights; and

(4) Termination of parental rights will not do more harm than good.

See also N.J. Div. of Youth & Fam. Serv. v. A.W., 103 N.J. 591, 604-05 (1986).

Judge Cohen found from the evidence, which we briefly outlined above, that defendant was unable to protect her children from abuse, that defendant had failed to provide a safe and stable home, and that the delay in establishing a permanent placement was causing harm to the children. In addition, Judge Cohen observed that the Division had made reasonable efforts to provide defendant with services, all of which he carefully delineated in his decision. Judge Cohen also determined that the Division had considered alternatives to the termination of parental rights, but found them inappropriate under the circumstances. Lastly, the judge concluded that the termination of defendant's parental rights would not do more harm than good.

The applicable standard of appellate review requires that we defer to a trial judge's factual findings when they are based on credible evidence in the record and unless we are convinced those findings are "so wholly unsupportable as to result in a denial of justice." In re Guardianship of J.N.H., 172 N.J. 440, 472 (2002); Cesare v. Cesare, 154 N.J. 394, 411-12 (1998). After careful review, we conclude that the record contains clear and convincing evidence to support the trial judge's findings and that the judge applied the correct legal standards in terminating defendant's parental rights.

We affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Cohen's comprehensive and thoughtful oral decision.

Affirmed.

 

Defendant is also the mother of C.B.D.B. (born June 22, 2001), who is not the subject of this litigation.

All the natural fathers of these children were named as parties; all defaulted. Their rights were terminated and no appeal has been filed on their behalf.

N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1 contains a strong public policy in favor of permanency. In re Guardianship of K.H.O., 161 N.J. 337, 357-58 (1999). Children have a "paramount need" for permanent and defined parent-child relationships. In re Guardianship of J.C., 129 N.J. 1, 26 (1992).

(continued)

(continued)

6

A-6430-04T4

RECORD IMPOUNDED

May 24, 2006