This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case involves the termination of parental rights of a mother diagnosed with borderline personality disorder and borderline intellectual function. Over a five-year period, the New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department (the Department) provided various services to address repeated reports of abuse and neglect of her children. Despite these efforts, the mother was unable to demonstrate the ability to parent safely, leading to the Department's motion to terminate her parental rights (paras 1, 3-10).
Procedural History
- District Court, 1992: The children's court division determined that the Department had made reasonable efforts to assist the mother but found no likelihood that she could safely parent in the foreseeable future. The court ordered the termination of her parental rights (para 1).
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Mother): Argued that the Department failed to properly evaluate her disabilities and provide appropriate treatment, violating federal and state laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act. She also claimed violations of her constitutional rights to equal protection and due process (paras 1, 11-15).
- Respondent (State of New Mexico, ex rel. Human Services Department): Asserted that it had made reasonable efforts to assist the mother over an extended period and that the termination of parental rights was justified due to her inability to provide safe and adequate care for her children (paras 1, 18-21).
Legal Issues
- Did the Department violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to provide services tailored to the mother's disabilities?
- Did the Department violate the Rehabilitation Act by not providing services that afforded the mother equal opportunity to achieve the same results as other parents?
- Were the mother's constitutional rights to equal protection and due process violated?
- Was the termination of parental rights supported by clear and convincing evidence under New Mexico law?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to terminate the mother's parental rights (para 25).
Reasons
Per Black J. (Minzner and Bosson JJ. concurring):
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The court found no violation of the ADA, as the relevant provisions were not in effect during much of the Department's involvement, and the Department had provided appropriate services in 1991. The ADA does not require the creation of specialized programs for individuals with disabilities (paras 11-12).
Rehabilitation Act: The court held that the Act does not preempt state law in parental termination cases. The Department's efforts were deemed reasonable and sufficient, and the Act does not mandate the creation of individualized programs for mentally handicapped individuals (paras 13-14).
Equal Protection and Due Process: The court rejected these claims, noting that the mother failed to raise them adequately at trial. Additionally, similar arguments have been consistently dismissed in New Mexico and other jurisdictions (para 15).
New Mexico Law: The court determined that the Department made reasonable efforts to assist the mother, including providing various services and therapies over five years. Despite these efforts, the mother was unable to demonstrate the ability to parent effectively, and the conditions of neglect and abuse were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. The court emphasized the best interests of the children, who had endured prolonged uncertainty, and found clear and convincing evidence to support termination (paras 16-23).
Conclusion: The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding it consistent with federal and state law and supported by clear and convincing evidence (para 25).