Background
The Cabinet for Health and Family Services became involved after reports that S.R. and her child had threatened suicide and that S.R. used methamphetamine in the child’s presence. After the child sought food from a neighbor and accessed a loaded gun left in the home, S.R. was arrested for possessing a handgun as a convicted felon. The Cabinet obtained custody so the child could receive mental-health treatment and later placed him in foster care.
S.R. stipulated to abuse or neglect and received a case plan requiring mental-health and substance-abuse assessments, parenting classes, drug screens, and other services. Although she completed some requirements, she missed more than 100 requested drug screens, tested positive for methamphetamine on the one screen she completed, inconsistently visited the child, and failed to provide support or basic necessities. After a March 2025 hearing that S.R. did not attend, the Boyle Family Court terminated her parental rights. Her appointed appellate counsel filed an A.C. brief stating that no meritorious appellate issue existed, and S.R. filed a supplemental brief herself.
The Court’s Holding
The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed. It independently reviewed the record and rejected S.R.’s due-process argument because the evidence showed that she knew the date and nature of the termination hearing but chose not to attend. Due process required notice and an opportunity to defend; it did not require her personal presence to confront and cross-examine witnesses in the termination proceeding.
The court also upheld the finding that the Cabinet made reasonable reunification efforts by offering assessments, parenting classes, free drug testing, and supervised visitation. Substantial evidence supported termination under KRS 625.090(2)(e) and (g), including S.R.’s continuing inability to provide essential parental care and protection, her failure to provide necessities for more than six months, her lack of progress on the case plan, and the absence of a reasonable expectation of improvement. Although the appellate court would have preferred a fuller written explanation from the family court, it found no clear error, legal error, abuse of discretion, or other reversible error.
Key Takeaways
- A parent who receives notice of a termination hearing and an opportunity to defend is not denied due process merely because the parent does not attend.
- Mental-health and substance-abuse assessments, parenting classes, free drug screens, and supervised visitation supported the finding that the Cabinet made reasonable reunification efforts.
- A termination judgment may stand when substantial evidence establishes at least one statutory ground, termination serves the child’s best interests, and the required neglect finding is supported by the record.
Why It Matters
The opinion illustrates the substantial deference Kentucky appellate courts give family courts in termination cases, particularly when the material facts are largely undisputed. It also confirms that a family court may take judicial notice of an underlying juvenile record when evaluating termination, even though a more complete written explanation of the court’s reasoning remains preferable.