COA affirms TPR order over erroneous exercise challenge
State v. E.L., 2026AP1497, 9/9/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
“Emily” appeals the circuit court’s order terminating her parental rights to her child, “Gretchen,” arguing that the court erroneously exercise of discretion when it found that termination was in Gretchen’s best interests. Emily claims the court failed to consider whether Gretchen had substantial relationships with other family members, and whether it would be harmful to her if those relationships were severed. COA affirms.
These state filed petition alleging two grounds for termination, and Emily pleaded no contest to one of the grounds. (¶2). Gretchen’s maternal grandmother testified at disposition about her relationship with Gretchen and her belief that it would be harmful if that relationship were severed. (¶¶3-4). The court recounted part of the grandmother’s testimony before rendering its decision. (¶5). When discussing the statutory factors, however, the court’s comments related only to Gretchen’s parents. (¶6). It ultimately decided that termination of Emily’s parental rights would be in Gretchen’s best interests.
On appeal, Emily argues that the circuit court failed to consider whether Gretchen had substantial relationships with family members other than her parents, and whether it would be harmful to sever those relationships. (¶10). As an aspect of the best interest analysis at disposition, circuit courts must consider “[w]hether the child has substantial relationships with the parent or other family members, and whether it would be harmful to the child to sever these relationships. Emily’s argument is based on the fact that, when explaining its reasoning as to why this particular factor weighed in favor of termination, the court only discussed Gretchen’s relationships with her parents, failing to consider Gretchen’s relationship with her grandmother.
Basing its decision on the lack of any “magic words” requirement, COA rejects Emily’s argument. (¶17). “While the circuit court did not, at that particular point in its decision, discuss Gretchen’s relationship with [her grandmother], it is obvious—when the record is considered as a whole—that the court adequately considered that relationship in making its decision.” COA also notes that the statute “does not explicitly require that the court consider each and every family member of the child in deciding whether the child has substantial relationships with them and whether it would be harmful to the child if those relationships were severed.” (¶16).