Pubdate: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 Source: Austin American-Statesman (TX) Copyright: 2008 Austin American-Statesman Contact: http://www.statesman.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/32 Author: Chuck Lindell Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/testing.htm (Drug Test) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment) LAST CHANCE TO KEEP KIDS PLAYS OUT IN COURTROOM For the mother who made a promise she couldn't keep, the reckoning arrives at 10:50 a.m. in a Travis County courtroom. Papers relinquishing her parental rights are ready to sign, but letting go of her 2-year-old daughter is proving to be too much. Tears flow down both cheeks and onto her blouse. Words catch in her throat. But for H, there's no way out. She promised to give up her daughter if her drug test came back dirty. It did. "I don't understand how cocaine got into my system," she says in a quivering voice. "I don't have a drug problem." "That's not what the evidence shows," Judge Rhonda Hurley snaps. H is in court for a permanency hearing, held six and 10 months after Child Protective Services removes a child from the home. They are the last mandatory hearings following seizure of a child, and they're meant to steer each case toward a final solution -- family reunification or separation. As always on the CPS docket, a deadline is pressing. Courts have one year to resolve each CPS case, and by the permanency hearings, time is critical. For months, H has been skipping drug treatment and ducking calls from her CPS caseworker -- lapses that put her at risk of losing her daughter. So she made a deal. If she could pass a hair follicle test, which detects long-term drug use, she would get a six-month extension on her case and more time to succeed in drug treatment. Fail, and she gives up her child. "It's time," Hurley announces, and H sobs because what the judge means is: Time's up. 'Good Luck To You' Some family breakups are all too predictable. Parents relapse into addiction, end up in jail or drop out, unable or unwilling to complete the parenting classes, therapy and self-improvement courses needed to regain the right to parent their children. The more difficult cases involve parents who are making sporadic progress, or children who are not -- particularly kids with mental health problems that complicate their relationships. No matter the difficulties, by the last permanency hearing, parents are either preparing to bring their kids home or choosing from four remaining options: Voluntarily relinquish parental rights. Go to trial, where prosecutors will fight to terminate their parental rights. Go to mediation, which usually ends with families being separated. But at least parents can designate a relative for adoption or negotiate some other favorable outcome, such as shared custody with an in-law. Ask the judge for a six-month extension -- rarely granted and reserved only for parents showing progress. H, 25, does not meet that definition. "(Your daughter) needs to know where she's going to be. She needs a forever home," the judge says. "At some point I need to stop focusing on you and I need to start focusing on the child." Then Hurley softens her tone, calling another case to give the mother time to sign the termination papers in private. The judge adds that she will do the "prove-up" -- a short, formal hearing to forever sever parental rights -- today. "Mom, you don't have to stay for that. You can go," Hurley says. "Good luck to you, Mom." H nods and mouths a silent thank you. Her chair is empty 20 minutes later when she ceases, legally, to be a mother. 'You Had Your Chance' The father, in federal prison until 2014 on drug charges, is out of the picture. The mother, a drug user for 16 of her 30 years, is in jail for another five months -- but the one-year deadline on her CPS case is three months away. Addicted to methamphetamine, she's failed numerous treatment programs and appears to have little chance of keeping her 2-year-old son. But guided by reports that she is doing remarkably well in her prison drug-treatment program, the judge grants a six-month extension to her CPS case. "She's on the right track," Hurley concedes. "But the test is when she gets out of prison and has access to drugs again." Hurley handles most of Travis County's permanency hearings and has learned to be skeptical of addicts -- and few drugs are trickier than methamphetamine, a highly addictive stimulant. In fact, a similar case - -- a father in jail, the mother a longtime drug user -- results in a different decision. "If given a drug test today, will you pass?" Hurley asks the mother, 21. "I should. The last time I used was a week ago," D replies. It's not a winning answer, especially from a woman who skipped a taxpayer-financed stay in a Fredericksburg drug-treatment center. "I don't understand why you don't understand what's at stake. She's been away from you for almost a year, and she's 2 years old," Hurley says. Quietly sobbing, D doesn't answer. Finally, she chokes out: "All I'm asking for is one more chance." "You had your chance," the judge says. 'Can I Go Home' A year ago, J was racing toward the grave, though barely a teenager. She skipped school, ran away regularly and was sleeping on the streets. One day she stole a car, flipped it over and was caught. Her single mother was overwhelmed and unable to cope. CPS ordered family therapy and placed the girl in a residential treatment center to address self-destructive behaviors. Slowly, mother and daughter repaired their relationship with help from their church, the mother tells Hurley. "I think it's going really well," she says. "It's just about keeping each other accountable." Told that J is outside the courtroom, Hurley invites the ninth-grader in. Unless they are too young to understand what is being said, children are never in court while cases are discussed -- but every judge makes time to meet them afterward. J, in a black T-shirt and silver necklace, smiles shyly as she sits next to her mom at the defense table. "Can I go home?" she asks the judge. "I am going to let you do that," Hurley says. "But still go to school. Still work on your grades. Because you still have to see me." Hurley orders J home on a "return and monitor" program -- a common early step in family reunions. CPS caseworkers will make about eight weekly home visits, followed by monthly checkups. If all goes well, a judge will transfer custody from CPS to the parents. "I'm almost as proud as your mother," the judge says. "Congratulations to you both." 'Convince Me' CPS found the four children, ages 8 to 2, living in filth, caseworker Willimae Fulton testifies. Trash, rotting food and dirty diapers -- enough to fill seven large garbage bags -- covered the floors. The bathroom was a horror, the stench overpowering. It was even worse than conditions CPS investigators found in 2003, when the same family had to move because their home was too filthy to properly clean. "Even though we've been working with the parents, there is still no progress with them actually comprehending what is wrong with their house," Fulton says, recommending that Hurley terminate their parental rights. Hurley agrees. Canceling parents' legal right to raise their children is a drastic step. If parents object, the termination hearing can last for days and involve dozens of witnesses. But the vast majority of these hearings in Travis County -- about 94 percent in 2007 -- take only minutes because the parents do not fight termination. The burden of proof in these perfunctory "prove-ups" is the same as a long trial: There must be "clear and convincing" evidence that permanent separation from parents is in the child's best interest. It's the highest burden of proof in the civil court system, where CPS cases are tried. Because most terminations are unopposed, some of the most difficult decisions on the CPS docket are not whether to sever families, butwhether to reunite children with their parents. Such is the case of the 2-year-old with a huge head of hair, sitting in court with her parents. She's been home for four months under CPS supervision. Her parents have passed random drug tests and excelled in parenting classes, couples counseling and drug treatment programs. "I know a lot more about myself, my daughter, my family," the mother tells Hurley. "I grew up with my parents doing drugs. What I've been through ... I don't want to put my daughter through." Most courts render a verdict based on the past -- was a law broken, a contract violated? But with CPS cases, a judge must look into the future to decide whether each child will be truly safe if returned home. No case is dismissed lightly. Hurley questions the parents for another five minutes before she finally sits back. "I'm a little concerned that once everyone goes away, you will return to your previous lifestyle," she says. "The last thing I want to do is pick her up again. If I do, you won't get her back." Hurley pauses. Sighs. Speaks. "So, I dismiss the case. Please tell me I will not see you again." "Not unless it's in a restaurant or something," the father says to light laughter, including Hurley's. Even so, the judge can't resist one more warning. "She's a beautiful little girl, and you've got a lot to lose if I see you back here again." - ---------------------------------- RECURRING ABUSE Among Travis County children removed by CPS but returned home in 2002, about 1 in 8 was later seized again by CPS. The local rate was better than statewide, where 1 in 6 returned kids was later removed by CPS. Texas Travis County Children removed in 2002: 11,309, 557 Children returned home: 3,349(30%), 141(25%) Returned children seized again:* 542(16%), 17(12%) *As of May 31, 2008 Source: Department of Family and Protective Services - --- MAP posted-by: Steve Heath