IN THE INTEREST OF C. A. B., a child.
MILLER, P. J., RICKMAN and HODGES, JJ.
this, her second appeal to this Court,  the mother of C.
A. B. appeals the termination of her parental rights to the
child, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support
the result. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
On appeal from an order terminating parental rights, we
review the evidence in the light most favorable to the
juvenile court's judgment in order to determine whether
any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and
convincing evidence that the natural parent's rights to
custody have been lost. We neither weigh evidence nor
determine witness credibility, but defer to the juvenile
court's findings of fact and affirm unless the appellate
standard is not met.
and punctuation omitted.) In re U. G., 291 Ga.App.
404, 404 (662 S.E.2d 190) (2008).
the record and the evidence presented at the
termination hearing reflect that C. A. B. was born in Georgia
on February 22, 2016, and that, at the time of his birth,
both the child and his mother tested positive for cocaine.
After his birth, C. A. B. suffered from withdrawal symptoms
such as shaking, sucking, respiration issues, and poor sleep
after feeding. The Whitfield County Department of Family and
Children Services ("DFACS") removed C. A. B. from
his mother's custody two days after birth. The juvenile
court placed the child in foster care and, in April 2016,
found that he was dependent as a result of his
parents' substance abuse, which finding has not
established a reunification case plan for the parents. The
case plan required the parents (1) to obtain and maintain
stable housing and income; (2) to complete a DFACS-sanctioned
parenting class; (3) to pay child support; (4) to take
psychological evaluations and follow the resulting
recommendations; (5) to complete drug treatment programs; (6)
to cooperate and communicate with DFACS; (7) to attend visits
regularly with the child; and (8) to obtain approved hair
follicle drug tests or a drug screens as requested. The court
itself ordered the parents to pay child support, attend
weekly supervised visits, and undergo substance abuse
treatment and random drug screens.
2016, the juvenile court conducted a case plan review,
judicial review, and permanency planning hearing. As a
result, the court found by clear and convincing evidence that
DFACS had reviewed the case plan goals with the parents; that
the mother was asked to take a hair follicle drug screen but
failed to do so; that the child continued to be dependent;
that the mother was required to pay $65 per week in child
support "beginning immediately"; and that the
mother was notified that failure to pay support for a period
of six months or more may result in termination of parental
rights. In June 2016, the mother tested positive for cocaine
in a hair follicle test.
citizen panel review was conducted in September 2016, but the
parents failed to attend; the mother explained that she and
the father were too tired because the mother was again
pregnant and the father had just been released from jail.
Based on the panel's findings, the court found that,
although the parents had visited the child, the parents had
not complied with the recommendations from their
psychological evaluations, had not complied with requested
hair follicle drug tests, and were not paying child support.
This order was not appealed.
November, 2016, following a permanency hearing, the juvenile
court found that the mother had failed to provide random drug
screen results, had refused to be screened by an approved
provider, and had provided no proof of completion of any case
plan goals other than visitation. The court ordered that the
parents schedule a hair follicle drug test with DFACS as soon
as possible following the hearing and to provide any and all
proof of completion of any case plan goals immediately.
that month, the court conducted another review, which the
parents attended. The court found that the parents had
submitted proof of adequate housing but proof of only one
week of income in the past four months; that the parents had
failed to provide adequate proof that they had completed
parenting training; that the parents had repeatedly refused
to obtain random drug screens from acceptable labs; that they
specifically failed to submit proof that they took a
court-ordered drug screen on November 2, 2016; that the
mother tested positive for cocaine in June 2016; and that the
parents had not submitted proof of drug or alcohol treatment
enrollment or completion. The court concluded:
As of this date, the court does not have proof of income,
proof of dates of employment, proof of alcohol and drug
treatment completion, proof of child support payments or
proof of completion of treatment recommended by the
psychological evaluations from someone proven to be competent
to offer that treatment.
parents did not appeal from this order. In a drug screen that
had been pending at the time of the court's order, the
mother again tested positive for cocaine.
on a citizen panel review in March 2017, the juvenile court
found that the parents had "failed to appear for any
screens or to provide screens when ordered in court,"
and that after being given an additional opportunity to
submit proof of an appropriate screen, the parents failed to
do so. In April 2017, DFACS petitioned to terminate parental
rights in both parents. Following a May 2017 permanency
hearing, at which the parents failed to appear despite proper
notice, the juvenile court found by clear and convincing
evidence "that the parents had made no progress ...