Appeals Court Terminates Parental Rights
Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. Represents Guardian ad Litem for Siblings
Dec 7, 2009
Minneapolis -- The Minnesota Court of Appeals has now affirmed a decision of the Blue Earth County District Court that terminated the parental rights for three small children, two of whom were born as conjoined twins and separated after birth at St. Mary's Hospital in Rochester. A week after one of the twins was discharged from the hospital, the parents brought the infant to the emergency room with bruises, abrasions and multiple fractures. Blue Earth County petitioned the District Court to terminate parental rights, and the Guardian ad Litem, represented by Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P., joined in the petition.
After a two-week trial, the District Court, in February 2008, ordered a termination of parental rights to all three children and concluded that the numerous fractures inflicted on the twin constituted egregious harm, which had been caused by at least one of the parents. On appeal by the children's' mother, the Court of Appeals in October 2008 sent the case back to the District for further findings in light of a Minnesota Supreme Court decision regarding the applicable legal standard for termination of parental rights for egregious harm. The District Court then issued supplemental findings in May 2009, finding that the mother knew or should have known of the egregious harm, and intentionally delayed seeking treatment for injuries that were life threatening. The District Court again ordered that parental rights be terminated as to all three children, which order was appealed by the mother.
In an unpublished opinion released on November 10, 2009, the Court of Appeals upheld the District court's conclusion that the mother's intentional delay in seeking treatment constituted egregious harm in the form of felony neglect of a child. The Court of Appeals also held that clear and convincing evidence supported the District Court's conclusion that the mother knew or should have known that the child suffered egregious harm in the form of substantial bodily harm.
"This case is a vivid example of the heart-wrenching factual and legal issues that are often presented in a termination of parent rights proceeding," said James R. Safley, a partner with Robins, Kaplan Miller & Ciresi L.L.P., who with team members Cy Morton and Damien Riehl, has been representing the Guardian ad Litem of the three young siblings as a result of the firm's ongoing Guardian ad Litem Pro Bono Project. "However, the paramount consideration in this type of proceeding is the health, safety and best interests of the child, and here the District Court found that ‘any interest the parents have in maintaining parental rights is far outweighed by the children's interest in living in a home where the children's interest in health and safety will come first.'"
Related Links