## Facts

- The Department of Children and Families (DCF) filed a care-and-protection petition alleging Ilona was a child in need of care and protection.
- After a five-day Juvenile Court trial, the judge found Ilona’s mother and father currently unfit and found their unfitness likely to continue into the indefinite future to a near certitude.
- The unfitness findings relied on a long-standing pattern of physical abuse, the impact of the mother’s cognitive limitations, limited improvement in parenting, and ongoing problems in the mother-child relationship.
- The judge committed Ilona to DCF custody and approved DCF’s adoption plan by Ilona’s then-current foster (preadoptive) parents, noting Ilona’s extraordinary progress in that home.
- Although the judge found a significant attachment between Ilona and her mother and found continued contact in Ilona’s best interests, the judge declined to order a specific visitation schedule and left contact decisions to the preadoptive parents.
- The Appeals Court affirmed termination but ruled the judge abused discretion by not ordering visitation; further appellate review was granted.

## Issues

1. Whether the Juvenile Court erred in terminating the mother’s parental rights where the mother argued her unfitness would likely be temporary if DCF provided adequate services and support.
2. Whether the Juvenile Court abused its discretion by declining to enter a specific posttermination visitation order after finding continued contact with the mother was in the child’s best interests.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the decree dispensing with the mother’s consent to adoption and upheld approval of the adoption plan.
- The Court held the judge did not clearly err in finding DCF made reasonable efforts to enable reunification and did not clearly err in finding no reasonable likelihood the mother’s unfitness would be temporary.
- The Court held the judge did not abuse discretion in concluding termination served Ilona’s best interests, including in light of Ilona’s progress in the preadoptive home.
- The Court held the judge did not abuse discretion by declining to order a specific visitation schedule and by leaving visitation decisions to the sound judgment of the preadoptive parents.

## Legal Principles

- Parental rights may be terminated (and consent to adoption dispensed with) upon a finding of parental unfitness and a determination that termination serves the child’s best interests.
- In assessing termination, a judge considers whether parental unfitness is likely to continue and whether DCF made reasonable efforts to make reunification safely possible; reasonable efforts do not require every conceivable service or indefinite continuation where progress is limited.
- Appellate review is deferential: factual findings are reviewed for clear error, and ultimate determinations for abuse of discretion or legal error.
- A finding that continued contact with a biological parent would benefit the child does not automatically require a court-ordered visitation schedule; a judge may leave posttermination contact to adoptive or preadoptive parents where the record supports that they will exercise appropriate judgment in the child’s best interests.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed termination of the mother’s parental rights and clarified that, even when a judge finds continued contact would benefit a child, the judge may permissibly leave visitation decisions to preadoptive parents rather than imposing a specific, enforceable visitation order.


Adoption of Ilona, 459 Mass. 53, 944 N.E.2d 115 (2011)