In re Interest of Jay S. & Paige B.

Caselaw Number
A-11-282
Filed On


SUMMARY: Termination of parental rights was proper where the father did little to address his issues as a batterer, the mother consistently denied any domestic violence against her and would allow the father would have ongoing contact, and the child’s behaviors that were consistent with exposure to domestic violence got substantially worse.

Jay S., DOB 2/97, and Paige B., DOB 9/07, were removed from the home on October 10, 2008, due to exposure of domestic violence between the parents. Tammy is the mother of Jay and Paige and Daniel is the father of Paige. The children were adjudicated on March 20, 2009, and disposition was held on May 4, 2009, where the court ordered to cooperate with DHHS, attend therapy and visitation, and for Daniel to refrain from assaultive behavior and drug use and submit to a substance abuse evaluation. Multiple review hearings were held over the next several months. Since the beginning of the case, Tammy continually denied any physical violence committed by Daniel even though she consistently showed up to visitation with bruising on her face, neck and arms. Tammy also had continued contact with Daniel and maintained an intimate relationship with him for the majority of the case. She inconsistently attended individual therapy and made little progress in tackling the therapeutic goals. Daniel was verbally threatening to the caseworker and had his visitation with the children suspended as a result. He infrequently attended therapy and did not complete a recommended psychological evaluation but did participate in family support services. In the past several years, Daniel had frequent law enforcement contact related to violence against women. Jay had attended therapy since the age of 6 and behaviors substantially deteriorated since that time and would continue to do so if continuing to be exposed to domestic violence. By age 12, Jay was already showing signs of a batterer. Tammy indicated that if the children were reunited with her, she would allow Daniel to have contact and did not believe him a threat. On September 29, 2010, the State filed a motion to terminate the parents’ parental rights and after trial beginning January 6, 2011, the juvenile court terminated the parents’ parental rights. Both parents appealed.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed the terminations of parental rights. After finding that the children were out of the home more than 15 of the past 22 months, the Court of Appeals held that Daniel did not comply with the court’s orders, failing to consistently attend therapy or submit to UAs and failing to attend substance abuse treatment or complete a psychological evaluation. As to Tammy, the Court of Appeals noted that she promptly completed a Pre-Treatment Assessment and attended visitation but that she failed otherwise to make progress in putting herself in a position to have her children returned to her. She continued her relationship with Daniel, denied domestic violence, failed to attend therapy consistently and failed to understand how domestic violence affects her children. The Court of Appeals also noted Jay’s deteriorating behavior. The Court of Appeals concluded by saying Tammy’s “determination to have Daniel involved in her children’s lives showed an utter lack of comprehension of the risk that Daniel posed to them, not only as potential victims but also as to the effect that witnessing domestic violence can have on them.”