Appeals court considers whether trial court erred in terminating mother's parental rights

An appellate panel of Justices Ariane Bueno, Joseph Dipkoff and Andrew D'Angelo heard oral argument in Department of Children and Families v. Mother (2025-0803), where the mother appeals the trial court's order terminating her parental rights.

Appellant Laura Smith told the panel the trial court erred in finding by clear and convincing evidence that the mother was "unfit to provide minimally acceptable care" and urged the court to vacate the termination and remand for further hearings. Smith said the child had food, clothing, shelter, medical care and school enrollment while in the mother's care and that, although an older sibling sometimes provided substitute caregiving, the mother remained the primary caregiver.

Smith highlighted several trial facts: the child missed 19 of about 180 school days in 2021'22 and about 26 of roughly 120 days in 2022'23; the school did not file a Section 51A report; and some caregiving assistance came from an older sibling who at times resided with the mother. Smith also told the court the DCF petition was filed in May 2023 after a March 2023 hospitalization for a seizure and that the mother had made more recent efforts to engage with services, including participation with a program called Clean Slate.

Counsel for the Department of Children and Families, Claire Gilchrist, urged the panel to affirm. Gilchrist said "mother's substance use disorder and alcohol use disorder greatly compromised her ability to care for [the] child and meet her needs," and added that the mother's untreated mental-health issues and behavior during visits demonstrated persistent parental deficits. Gilchrist said the department's primary permanency plan at trial was adoption by the current foster parents and that guardianship by the sister was only a contingency that had not been sufficiently stabilized because the sister had not resolved housing concerns.

Justices asked pointed questions about the link between the mother's medical events and neglect. One justice noted the trial judge found a March 2023 seizure was alcohol-related and asked whether that supported a finding that the mother could not safely care for the child. Laura Smith responded that the record did not show further seizures and emphasized the mother's recent engagement with services. The panel also probed whether the trial court had made findings about the older sibling's capacity to substitute as caregiver; Smith said the trial judge did not make such findings and that DCF continued to assess the sibling for guardianship.

Noor Kasmi, attorney for the child, argued termination was necessary to secure the child's legal permanency and to avoid repeated litigation. Kasmi cited an 11-year history of substance use and untreated mental health issues, inconsistent and at times distressing visits (including testimony that the mother called the child "a moron" and a "retard" and, in the last visit before trial, took the child's glasses and failed to return them), and the child's notable improvements in foster care, including more regular school attendance.

After questioning concluded, the panel took the case under advisement. No ruling was issued from the bench.

The court will issue an opinion after reviewing the full record and briefs.