In Re: A.A.D. (dissenting memorandum)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

J-S06001-13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: A.A.D. APPEAL OF: S.T.S., THE MOTHER No. 1739 MDA 2012 Appeal from the Decree September 10, 2012 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Orphans' Court at No(s): 82559 BEFORE: MUNDY, J., OLSON, J., and STRASSBURGER, J.* DISSENTING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J. Filed: February 15, 2013 I respectfully dissent. Because Mother was making progress toward her goals and the trial court did not conduct a bonding analysis, I would deny counsel s petition to withdraw and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum. It is undeniable that Mother has a long history of drug and alcohol use, failed attempts at rehabilitation, engaging in prostitution, and extreme difficulty maintaining stability. Nonetheless, as of the date of the hearing, September 10, 2012, Mother had been in a rehabilitation program since July 12, 2012 and lived in a home where A.A.D. could reside. At the same time, ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S06001-13 CYS presented no testimony that A.A.D. s current placement is a preadoptive home or how long she has been in that placement. As such, I believe that before we make an irreparable decision to terminate Mother s parental rights to her only child, we should wait a few more months to see if Mother s one last effort at treatment has worked. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.