IN RE: Treyvon J.
K09CP04009296A
Decided: January 17, 2012
Mother filed a petition to reinstate her guardianship rights on October 26, 2010. ? The petition was properly served upon father and the legal guardian, and both appeared with counsel. ? Mother had court appointed counsel as well. ? The child was represented by counsel. ? This court has jurisdiction. ? The matter was referred to the department of children and families (?DCF?) for a reinstatement study, and eventually was tried to the court. ? The court heard testimony from four witnesses: ?mother, the DCF author of the reinstatement study, Treyvon’s juvenile probation officer for a non-judicial truancy referral, and mother’s service coordinator from Reliance House. ? Two exhibits were entered into evidence. ? Having considered all of the evidence, including the demeanor of the witnesses, the court finds the following by a fair preponderance of the evidence.
General statutes section 46b?129(m) establishes the dispositional standards governing this case. ??Section 46b?129(m) provides in relevant part that a parent ? may file a motion to revoke a commitment, and, upon finding that cause for commitment no longer exists, and that such revocation is in the best interests of such child or youth, the court may revoke the commitment of such child or youth ? Under the In re Stacy G. framework, [t]he initial burden is placed on the persons applying for the revocation of commitment to allege and prove that cause for commitment no longer exists ? If the party challenging the commitment meets that initial burden, the commitment to the third party may then be modified if such change is in the best interest of the child ? The burden falls on the persons vested with guardianship to prove that it would not be in the best interests of the child to be returned to his or her natural parents.? ?(Citations omitted; ?emphasis in the original; ?internal quotations omitted.) ?In re Cameron C., 103 Conn.App. 746, 757, 930 A.2d 826 (2007), cert. denied, 285 Conn. 906, 942 A.2d 414 (2008).
Treyvon was born to mother on May 6, 1998. ? On March 23, 2004, DCF was granted an order of temporary custody to Treyvon, removing him from his mother. ? The presenting issues were mother’s substance abuse and her untreated mental health issues, and her resulting inability to meet Treyvon’s needs. ? On August 31, 2004, the child was committed to DCF. While reunification efforts were being pursued, the parties were attempting to place the child with an aunt in Georgia. ? This latter plan never was effectuated, and, eventually, Treyvon’s guardianship was transferred with subsidy to his aunt, Angie S. on February 19, 2008. ? At the time of transfer, the parties entered into a written stipulation and agreement regarding access and visitation which was approved and ordered by the court.
Following the transfer of guardianship, mother began to achieve success with services. ? Her crack cocaine addiction abated. ? She claims sobriety since 2008, with an acknowledged relapse in 2009. ? She has been steadily engaged in mental health treatment through Sound Community Services. ? Her diagnosis is that of major depressive recurrent, severe with psychotic features, and generalized anxiety disorder. ? She is seen monthly for medication management, and sees her individual therapist one to two times per month. ? Her treatment goals are to maintain stable moods, reduce anxiety and depression, improve coping skills, and maintain sobriety. ? Mother is compliant with treatment, has been for some time, and her therapist reported no concerns to DCF.
Mother has been a client of the Reliance House in Norwich, and the court heard from Nicole Pensis, her community service coordinator. ? The witness has been working as a support for mother with respect to budgeting concerns and custody issues. ? Mother has section 8 housing and Reliance House pays mother’s rent and utilities out of mother’s monthly benefits. ? The balance, approximately $400 per month, is given to mother for her own use. ? Reliance House helps mother understand her bills and budget needs. ? Mother has a clean, well-appointed apartment. ? Ms. Pensis spends a very limited amount of time with mother, approximately one to three hours per month, and her function is of a supportive nature.
There is no obligation for a parent to be entirely self-sufficient in order to have guardianship rights. ? Supportive services are legally permissible. ? See In re Luis C., 210 Conn. 157, 167, 554 A.2d 722 (1989). ? Mother has appropriately and constructively engaged the services of Reliance House and Sound Community Services as supports. ? These supports are not bars to reinstatement.
The court finds by a fair preponderance of the evidence that mother has successfully addressed the issues that led to her loss of guardianship, i.e. substance-abuse, untreated mental health needs, and unstable housing.
The more vexing issue is whether restoration of guardianship and custody would be in Treyvon’s best interests. ? The current guardian supports reunification, but feels that it is premature. ? No evidence was presented which indicates that mother has any present concerns other than those of a predictive neglect nature, based upon mother’s current mental health diagnoses and her lengthy and substantial history of crack cocaine addiction. ? As to mother the progress contemplated for reinstatement has occurred for a sufficiently lengthy time period, so the issue is whether now is the right time for restoration.
There were also concerns expressed regarding allegations of prior maltreatment of Treyvon by his older brother. ? His brother, now an adult, has mental health issues and is presently involved with two state agencies, DCF and DMHAS. ? He lives separately from mother, and she sees him approximately every other week for a brief visit. ? This brother has had mutual visits at mother’s house with Treyvon, supervised by mother, and no reports of troubling behaviors were made. ? The prior allegations regarding the older brother are insufficient to prevent reunification.
The core issue is Treyvon. ? His best interest, like all children’s best interest, calls for ? ? a place that will foster the child’s interest in sustained growth, development, well-being, and in the continuity and stability of its environment.? ?In re Cameron C., supra, 103 Conn.App. 759. ? Treyvon says he loves both his guardian and his mother, but wishes to live with his mother. ? His mother has maintained regular visitation with him, and her home is adequate to meet his physical needs. ? The concern for the court is whether this home is capable of meeting his present educational needs.
Treyvon’s guardian is meeting all his physical needs, but Treyvon’s education has suffered due to truancy issues and behavioral issues in school. ? His behaviors have resulted in several suspensions during the 2010?2011 school year. ? The school made a family with service needs referral to the juvenile court based upon Treyvon’s truancy. ? A juvenile probation officer testified that Treyvon and his guardian were referred to the Family Support Center and IICAPS for treatment. ? These programs are designed to address vital concerns surrounding Treyvon’s educational issues and his school placement. ? The court finds it would not be in Treyvon’s best interest to change his placement while these educational issues are being addressed.
However, it will be important to make mother a part of the program. ? She needs her guardianship rights to fully access the child’s records and to participate in his educational programs. ? The court’s concerns are directed more to issues of custody then guardianship.
Accordingly, the court finds that mother has successfully addressed the issues that led to her loss of guardianship rights; ?that it would be in Treyvon’s best interest to reinstate mother in a guardianship role; ?that is equally in his best interest to retain his aunt in a guardianship role; ?and that it is in his best interest to remain in his aunt’s physical custody while Treyvon, aunt, and mother address his educational behaviors and deficiencies.
Accordingly, mother’s petition to reinstate her guardianship rights is granted, in part, as follows: ?Mother is to be co-guardian of Treyvon with his paternal aunt, A.S., as co-guardian. ? Physical custody of Treyvon will remain with his paternal aunt through the conclusion of the 2011?2012 school year. ? Mother will have visitation with Treyvon at her home at least two weekends every month, the dates to be mutually agreed upon by mother and aunt. ? Mother will have Treyvon during the school’s spring vacation for an uninterrupted visit. ? Mother will continue with her current programs while Treyvon is in aunt’s physical custody. ? The parties will return to court at 2 p.m. on June 5, 2012 to further address the issue of physical custody and guardianship.
BY THE COURT
John C. Driscoll, J.
Driscoll, John C., J.