Background
L.S. was born on May 20, 2024, and was placed in the provisional custody of the State of Louisiana just two days later after the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received multiple reports that the mother, K.S., had threatened to harm the child and had struck the father, J.F., with her vehicle during a domestic dispute. J.F., who became combative en route to the hospital and was subsequently hospitalized at a psychiatric facility, was also a subject of concern; K.S. reported that his methamphetamine use had precipitated their altercation. DCFS filed a child in need of care (CINC) petition on June 17, 2024, and the 22nd Judicial District Court for St. Tammany Parish approved a series of case plans setting goals for both parents, including requirements related to housing, employment, financial stability, mental health, and domestic violence.
K.S. completed certain case plan tasks — drug screens, a mental health assessment, parenting education, and domestic violence education — and obtained public housing in February 2025 with DCFS assistance. However, DCFS caseworker Memoree Plaisance and Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) volunteer Sandra Menendez raised persistent concerns about K.S.’s financial instability, recurring utility shutoffs, refusal of referrals to disability, rehabilitation, and financial literacy services, ongoing domestic violence and interpersonal conflicts, and her failure to acknowledge any responsibility for her children’s removal. K.S. made only one $50 child-support payment — in July 2025 — despite having agreed to contribute $50 per month from the outset. J.F. was incarcerated and did not appeal. On June 17, 2025, DCFS filed a petition to terminate both parents’ rights under La. Ch. Code art. 1015(4)(b) (abandonment) and art. 1015(5) (failure to substantially comply with case plan).
Following a hearing on October 1, 2025, the trial court terminated the parental rights of both K.S. and J.F. and certified L.S. for adoption in a judgment signed October 3, 2025. K.S. appealed, arguing that she had substantially complied with her case plan, that DCFS had not made reasonable reunification efforts, that there was a reasonable probability of future improvement, and that her failure to pay child support stemmed solely from poverty.
The Court’s Holding
The Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the termination of K.S.’s parental rights in full. Applying the manifest error standard of review, the court found that DCFS established by clear and convincing evidence both statutory grounds under La. Ch. Code art. 1015: abandonment under section (4)(b), based on K.S.’s failure to provide significant contributions to L.S.’s care and support for well over six consecutive months; and failure to substantially comply with her court-approved case plan under section (5), with no reasonable expectation of significant improvement in the near future.
The court rejected K.S.’s poverty defense to the abandonment ground, finding that her minimal financial contributions reflected choices, priorities, and an unwillingness to pursue more stable employment, rather than an inability to pay. The court also rejected her argument that DCFS failed to make reasonable reunification efforts, noting that the agency helped K.S. secure housing, provided consistent transportation to visits, and made multiple referrals to disability, rehabilitation, and financial literacy programs that K.S. refused or canceled. The court further found no error in the trial court’s best-interest determination, noting that L.S. had been in a pre-adoptive foster placement since birth, had formed a secure attachment with her foster parents, and was thriving alongside her sister R.S. in the same home.
All costs of the appeal were assessed to K.S.
Key Takeaways
- Under La. Ch. Code art. 1015(4)(b), a parent’s failure to make significant financial contributions to a child’s care for more than six consecutive months supports an abandonment finding even if partial compliance with other case plan elements occurred; a poverty defense will fail where the evidence shows the shortfall stems from the parent’s priorities and choices rather than a genuine inability to pay.
- Substantial compliance with a case plan requires more than checking off discrete tasks — courts will look to whether the parent has demonstrated genuine behavioral change and an understanding of the reasons for removal; surface-level task completion while rejecting offered services and refusing accountability does not constitute substantial compliance under art. 1015(5).
- DCFS satisfies its reasonable-efforts obligation where the record shows the agency secured housing, provided transportation, and arranged multiple service referrals, even if the parent declined those referrals.
- Appellate review of termination judgments is under the manifest error standard; the First Circuit will not disturb a trial court’s factual findings unless the record lacks a reasonable basis for them or the findings are clearly wrong.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces that Louisiana courts evaluate parental fitness holistically, not merely by tallying completed case plan tasks. Parents facing termination proceedings must demonstrate internalized behavioral change — particularly accountability for the circumstances that led to removal — rather than selective compliance. The opinion signals that repeated refusals of agency-offered services, persistent financial instability attributable to the parent’s own choices, and an ongoing failure to prioritize the child’s needs over the parent’s own will collectively satisfy the clear-and-convincing standard for termination even where the parent has made some measurable progress.
The case also illustrates the evidentiary weight Louisiana courts place on CASA reports and foster-placement stability in best-interest determinations. Where a child has spent virtually their entire life in a pre-adoptive home and has formed secure attachments, that continuity will weigh heavily in favor of termination and adoption, underscoring the importance of early, consistent parental engagement once a CINC petition is filed.