Background
Mother and Father had three children before ending their relationship in 2017. Although Father later received supervised parenting time under successive court orders, he did not consistently attend visits, frequently rescheduled, communicated poorly, and sometimes went months without seeing the children. In 2022, he also took one child from Winslow to Phoenix in violation of a parenting-time order and did not return the child until several days later.
After a dispute surrounding a scheduled visit, Father obtained a protective order that restricted Mother’s contact with him. Mother did not respond to Father’s attempts to reach the children through her or third parties because she feared violating that order, and Father stopped attempting contact in 2023. Mother petitioned for termination in March 2024, alleging abandonment. Following trial, the superior court found that Father had failed to maintain contact, exercise his parenting time, seek judicial enforcement, or pay child support since 2019, and terminated his parental rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed the abandonment finding under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(1). The record showed that Father had not maintained a normal parental relationship, sent gifts or letters, provided financial support, or sought to enforce his parenting time. Although the superior court recognized that Mother obstructed some of Father’s attempts to communicate in 2022, Father later stopped trying altogether.
The court also held that Father’s depression, bipolar disorder, PTSD, transportation problems, financial hardship, and discouragement about further litigation did not establish just cause for his failure to maintain the relationship. A parent must persistently pursue a relationship and vigorously assert parental rights. The evidence likewise supported the best-interests finding because the children were stable and thriving with Mother, while Father had untreated behavioral-health issues associated with “explosiveness,” a history of domestic violence, and a record of violating court orders.
Key Takeaways
- Abandonment is judged by a parent’s conduct, including efforts to maintain contact and provide support, rather than by the parent’s subjective intent.
- Even when another parent obstructs contact, a parent must persistently pursue the relationship and use available legal procedures to assert parenting rights.
- The same evidence may support both the statutory ground for termination and the determination that termination serves the children’s best interests.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates that personal hardship and intermittent interference with parenting time will not necessarily excuse a prolonged failure to communicate, provide support, or seek enforcement of parenting rights. Courts may find abandonment when a parent makes only minimal efforts despite having legal avenues available.
The opinion also confirms that evidence establishing abandonment need not be excluded from the best-interests analysis. Facts such as prolonged absence, untreated behavioral-health concerns, violations of court orders, and the children’s stability with their custodial parent may bear on both inquiries.