Case Summary: DFS sought termination of parental rights for failure to plan by both parents. The Court first found that DFS made reasonable efforts to reunify child and parents. The Court went through the analysis for failure to plan under 13 Del.C. §1103(a)(5). The Court found the following relevant factors. Mother was involved with DFS and had a no contact order concerning her other child, which she violated. Mother had no employment and refused to cooperate with vocational rehabilitation services. Mother's parenting skills had not improved. Father was not a reliable source of income. The child had been in custody for 2.5 years. The Court found that there was a history of neglect, the child was bonded to his foster family, the child would experience emotional trauma if removed from his home and that failure to terminate the relationship of Mother and child would result in continued emotional instability. The Court also found that the Father's parental rights should be terminated because he has never assumed primary responsibility for the child, he failed to provide regular child support and he refused efforts by DFS to engage in planning to care for his son. Furthermore, if placement with Father failed it would be more difficult for the child to be adopted because he would be older. After a best interest analysis under 13 Del.C. §722 (a), the Court concluded that it would be in the best interests of the child to terminate parental rights.

Back to Case Law