Case Summary: Appellant mother appealed from an order of the Family Court terminating her parental rights in her biological child. She argued that the statute under which her rights where terminated is unconstitutional because it deprived her of her constitutional right to due process. Specifically she argued that because of the prior termination of her parental rights in her four older children, she was denied the opportunity to prove that she was able to care for her son.

The Court refused to follow this argument declaring that DFS must prove not only that her rights in other children were terminated but also that it is in the child’s best interest for the mother’s rights over him to be terminated. Thus, there is an inquiry into the fitness to rear the particular child at issue. The Court determined that in this case it was proved by clear and convincing evidence that it was in the child’s best interest to terminate the mother’s parental rights. Thus, the Court concluded that the parental rights were terminated not only because her parental rights over the other children had been involuntarily terminated, but also, because, it was in the best interest of the child to have her parental rights terminated.

Back to Case Law