 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re J.B.10/4/2005
veniles contingent on her completion of both in- patient and out-patient drug and alcohol treatment programs. Shortly after said review hearing, social worker Bobbie Webster advised [respondent] on how to seek such treatment and told her to bring verification of treatment in order to begin scheduling visits. [Respondent] did not provide verification about having begun treatment until the first morning of this hearing.
9. [Respondent] has also failed to keep social workers informed of her whereabouts during much of the time since the last review hearing. Bobbie Webster went to visit [respondent] at her previous address, on Vera Drive in Reidsville, North Carolina, and found only a sign on the door saying that [respondent] no longer lived there. Several months later, in November 2003, [respondent] left a message for Bobbie Webster, stating that she was living with [the father's] father in Greensboro, North Carolina. However, when Ms. Webster would call that telephone number, she could never reach [respondent] there and could only leave a message on the answering machine. [Respondent] was eventually served with a copy of the petition at that address, but as it took some time to do this, Ms. Webster had not known if that was indeed where she was living.
10. [Respondent] briefly reestablished contact with in December 2003 when she called Bobbie Webster and promised to bring verification of drug treatment with her when she brought the children's Christmas gifts tothe agency. In talking to Ms. Webster, [respondent] was vague about where she had been to treatment and how long she had been there. When she brought the gifts, [respondent] failed to bring the verification of treatment.
11. [Respondent] began a detox and treatment program at Alcohol and Drug Services of Guilford County on December 13, 2003, but has not completed the treatment recommended. She has presented verification of her treatment to the Court and to her social worker for the first time on January 22, 2004.
12. The discharge summary from Alcohol and Drug Services mentions alcohol dependency and withdrawal, but does not mention cocaine use. However, [respondent] and [the father] used crack cocaine together two or three weeks before this hearing commenced.
16. There exist grounds for termination of the respondents' parental rights with respect to the juveniles, J.B. and A.B. The children have been neglected by their parents and have been left in placement outside the home for more than twelve months without making reasonable progress. Both parents have substance abuse problems which have not been adequately addressed.
21. The parental rights of [respondent] and [the father], with respect to [J.B.] and [A.B.], should be terminated and it is in the minor children's best interests that the parental rights of the respondents be terminated.
With respect to finding of fact four, respondent abandons her sufficiency argument and asserts that the finding does not pertain to current conditions of her parental fitness. However, as our Supreme Court has made clear, a trial court may consider evidence of neglect prior to a respondent's loss of custody, including prior adjudications of neglect. In re Ballard, 311 N.C. at 715, 319 S.E.2d at 232. Finding of fact six relates to the additionalground for termination found by the trial court under N.C.G.S. § 7B-1111(a)(3), which we need not address here.
Respondent next challenges findings of fact eight, nine and ten. Respondent also abandons her sufficiency argument with respect to these findings and challenges them on the ground that they are not evidence of neglect nor evidence of the probability of a repetition of negle
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 North Carolina DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|