IN RE K.A.W. 133 S.W.3d 1 (2004) CASE BRIEF

IN RE K.A.W.

133 S.W.3d 1 (2004)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Mother (D) sought review of a judgment of the Circuit Court, which terminated her parental rights to twin girls.

FACTS: When D was pregnant with the twins she was already raising three other young children on her own while trying to hold a job. Overwhelmed, she struggled with the question of whether it was best to place her twins up for adoption. D decided that she should place them up for adoption because, as she later testified, she wanted them 'to have a better life.' The twin girls were born three months premature. They required a two-month hospital stay. D did not abandon them. She visited the twins in the hospital daily and continued caring for them, holding, feeding and talking to them. D expressed breast milk for their best care rather than allowing them to be fed formula. She took a special class to learn more about how to care for her premature twins. When the twins were released from the hospital, D woke hourly to feed and administer medicine to them, while still maintaining her obligations to her other children and her job. D carefully tried to investigate prospective families that might be suitable for the twins. She obtained the help of adoption professionals and attorneys. She expressed interest in an 'open adoption' so that she could maintain contact with the twins and continue to support them. D was told she would need to look beyond Missouri, which does not allow 'open adoption.' A prospective family from California was interviewed. D visited the couple for 10 days to be sure they were fit. D became convinced that the California couple was not as good a placement as she originally believed, so when she was in California for a visit, she retained the twins in her custody and began to seek another placement. D was advised that a British couple was still interested in adopting her babies. Eventually, British officials determined that the British couple was unfit. The twins were taken into the custody of a British children's services agency. The Arkansas court entered an order setting aside the adoption decree for lack of jurisdiction because none of the parties were Arkansas residents. The twins were returned to Missouri, where they were placed in the custody of the Missouri division of family services (DFS). D resolved to rear the babies herself and rally the support of her family so that she could do it well. After DFS gained jurisdiction of the twins, there is no evidence that any of D's conduct would indicate a likelihood of future problems. The trial court terminated D's parental rights in that there were multiple, unstable, inappropriate, temporary placements including, but not limited to, placements in California, Arkansas, and Great Britain within a span of a few months during the first months of 'The Twins' lives. D appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner