AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the appeal by Elisha M. (Mother) against the termination of her parental rights concerning her child, Angel A. The Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) took custody of the child, leading to legal proceedings to terminate Mother's parental rights.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): The arguments presented by CYFD are not explicitly detailed in the decision.
• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Argued that CYFD did not make reasonable efforts to assist her in alleviating the causes and conditions that led to the child being taken into custody. She specifically mentioned that CYFD could have provided more communication, transportation services, and a four-to-six-month inpatient program for addiction recovery (para 2).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Children, Youth and Families Department made reasonable efforts to assist the Mother in alleviating the causes and conditions that led to the child being taken into custody.

Disposition

• The termination of Mother’s parental rights was affirmed.

Reasons

• The decision was made by a panel consisting of Judges Megan P. Duffy, Kristina Bogardus, and Shammara H. Henderson, who concurred in the judgment. The Court concluded that the Mother did not present any new facts, law, or argument that persuaded the Court that the notice of proposed disposition was erroneous. The Court referenced case law stating that CYFD is only required to make reasonable efforts, not efforts subject to conditions unilaterally imposed by the parent. The Court also noted that what constitutes reasonable efforts may vary depending on factors such as the level of cooperation demonstrated by the parent and the recalcitrance of the problems rendering the parent unable to provide adequate parenting. The Court remained unpersuaded by the Mother's memorandum in opposition and affirmed the termination of her parental rights (paras 1-4).