In re Child Danielle F.

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a judgment terminating a mother's parental rights based on her inability to protect the child from jeopardy and inability to take responsibility for the child. The court held that proceeding with the termination hearing in the mother's absence did not violate due process and that termination, rather than a permanency guardianship, was in the child's best interest.

Holdings

1. A parent's due process rights are not violated merely because the parent is physically absent from part of a termination hearing when the parent received adequate notice and had an opportunity to be heard through counsel, including the opportunity to examine witnesses and respond to claims and evidence.
2. The District Court did not abuse its discretion by terminating the mother's parental rights rather than ordering a permanency guardianship because the evidence supported the finding that termination was in the child's best interest and the child needed permanency promptly.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the mother's due process rights were violated when the District Court commenced the termination hearing as scheduled in her absence, although the court knew she would arrive several hours later.
2. Whether the District Court abused its discretion by terminating the mother's parental rights instead of ordering a permanency guardianship.

Disposition

affirmed