In re Child Daniel Q.

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a District Court judgment terminating the father's parental rights to his child. The court held that competent evidence supported findings that the father was unable or unwilling to protect the child from jeopardy and had failed to make a good-faith effort to rehabilitate and reunify. The court also concluded that termination was supported by the child's best interests.

Holdings

1. The District Court did not clearly err in finding the father unfit because competent evidence established that he was unwilling or unable to protect the child from jeopardy within a time reasonably calculated to meet the child's needs and had failed to make a good-faith effort to rehabilitate and reunify.
2. The record also supported the District Court's finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that termination of the father's parental rights was in the child's best interest.

Questions Presented

1. Whether competent evidence supported the District Court's finding that the father was unwilling or unable to protect the child from jeopardy within a time reasonably calculated to meet the child's needs.
2. Whether competent evidence supported the District Court's finding that the father failed to make a good-faith effort to rehabilitate and reunify with the child.
3. Whether the evidence supported termination of the father's parental rights, including the finding that termination was in the child's best interest.

Disposition

affirmed