 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
J.S.H. v. Cabinet for Health and Family Services and Commonwealth6/17/2005
leges that such findings are required by law. KRS 600.020(1); KRS 625.090; Commonwealth of Kentucky, Cabinet for Families and Children v. T.L.M, et al, 139 S.W.3d 172, 175 (Ky., 2004). The court's judgment states that the children were neglected as defined in KRS 600.020, and that the best interests of the children were served by termination. These specific findings of fact are supported by documentary evidence contained in the record on appeal.
J.S.H. asserts that the court's ruling did not sufficiently define the alleged neglect. The record contains ample evidence of parental neglect on the part of J.S.H., including ongoing drug abuse and alcohol abuse in front of the children; driving under the influence of alcohol with the children in the car; inappropriate and aggressive behavior in the presence of the children; and failure to provide sufficient care for the children. The evidence is sufficient to support a finding of neglect.
The court's ruling notes that J.S.H. failed to comply with the terms of the probation, and that his parental rights should be terminated due to his non-compliance. The court found that J.S.H. "has failed to protect and preserve his children's fundamental rights to a safe and nurturing home, and has neglected [the children]...." J.S.H. claims that the court failed to take into account his seeking and holding full-time employment and his regular attendance at AA meetings when ruling on the termination proceeding. The court's findings of fact in the judgment appealed from include a finding that J.S.H. failed to attend regular counseling at Comprehensive Care, as required by the terms of probation, and a finding that J.S.H. was not honest when questioned by his counselor regarding suspected drinking. The court also found that J.S.H. refused to promptly comply with requests for drug testing, and that J.S.H. had failed to obtain a residence of his own, but rather remained living with his mother.
Based on the evidence before it, the court held that J.S.H. "has continuously or repeatedly failed or refused to provide, or has been substantially incapable of providing, essential parental care and protection for the children and there is no reasonable expectation of improvement in parental care and protection...." J.S.H. has not shown that the court was clearly erroneous in its finding that he failed to comply with the probationary terms agreed to by the parties.
Therefore, we affirm the trial court's decision.
ALL CONCUR.
Page 1 2 Kentucky DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|