The Vermont Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's termination of parental rights in a child protection case involving a mother and her young son, H.B., born in August 2021. The appeal, designated case number 25-AP-314, concluded with the high court upholding the family division's decision.
In September 2022, the State of Vermont filed a petition seeking a determination that H.B. was a child in need of care or supervision (CHINS). The supporting affidavits alleged that one-year-old H.B. was at imminent risk of harm because his mother was unable to ensure his safety or meet his basic needs. Following the petition, the Superior Court's Windsor Unit Family Division placed H.B. in the custody of the Department for Children and Families (DCF) under emergency and temporary care orders.
The case proceeded through the family court system with a contested merits hearing conducted over three days between January and May 2023. Trial Judge Howard A. Kalfus presided over the proceedings, which examined the circumstances surrounding H.B.'s care and living situation.
According to court findings issued in an August 2023 order, the mother was unable to provide primary care for H.B. from the time of his birth until he was placed in DCF custody. The court determined that the mother sought assistance from friends, family, and others who stayed at or frequented her home to help care for the child.
The family division found that at various times, the mother left H.B. in the care of others for extended periods without making appropriate legal arrangements. This pattern of care raised concerns about the child's welfare and supervision.
Particularly troubling to the court was the environment in which H.B. was being raised. The findings revealed that many people who were struggling with substance-use disorder came by the mother's home, and at times they were under the influence while H.B. was present. This created what the court characterized as an unsafe environment for the young child.
The court also noted changes in the mother's behavior beginning around mid-May or June 2022. According to the findings, the mother began exhibiting erratic behavior, described as being "fine one minute" and then "yelling and screaming over nothing." This behavioral pattern added to concerns about her ability to provide stable care for H.B.
Based on these findings, the family division concluded that H.B. was indeed a child in need of care or supervision under Vermont law. The CHINS determination is a legal finding that allows the state to intervene in family situations where children may be at risk of harm or neglect.
The mother appealed the family division's decision to terminate her parental rights, bringing the case before the Vermont Supreme Court. In family law cases, termination of parental rights represents one of the most serious interventions available to the state, permanently severing the legal relationship between parent and child.
Parental rights termination cases require courts to balance the fundamental rights of parents with the state's interest in protecting children from harm. Vermont law, like that in other states, requires clear and convincing evidence before courts can terminate parental rights.
The Vermont Supreme Court's entry order, issued during the January Term 2026, was brief but decisive. The high court affirmed the family division's decision without elaboration, indicating that the lower court's findings and legal conclusions were supported by the evidence and properly applied the law.
The case illustrates the challenges facing Vermont's child protection system in addressing situations where parents struggle with providing safe, stable environments for their children. The involvement of individuals with substance use disorders and the mother's inability to make appropriate care arrangements highlighted the complex factors that courts must consider in child welfare cases.
Entry orders like this one typically indicate that the Vermont Supreme Court found no reversible error in the lower court's proceedings. The three-justice panel that heard the appeal determined that the family division properly applied Vermont's child protection statutes and that the evidence supported the termination decision.
The case also demonstrates the multi-step process involved in child protection proceedings in Vermont. From the initial CHINS petition through the contested hearings and eventual appeal, the process took over three years, reflecting the careful consideration given to cases involving permanent separation of families.
With the Vermont Supreme Court's affirmation, the termination of the mother's parental rights to H.B. becomes final. The decision clears the way for H.B. to potentially be adopted or to remain in the permanent custody of the state through DCF.
The court's decision reflects Vermont's commitment to prioritizing child safety while ensuring that parents receive due process in proceedings that can permanently alter family relationships. The case serves as an example of how Vermont's family courts handle complex child protection matters involving parental capacity and child welfare concerns.