## Facts

- Unmarried parents lived together with three minor children (approximately four years, two years, and two months old).
- The mother brought the two-month-old infant to an emergency room with a swollen leg; medical evaluation revealed multiple severe injuries consistent with repeated physical abuse.
- Evidence indicated one parent likely inflicted the abuse and the other failed to prevent it, despite injuries that would have been immediately obvious; treatment was delayed about two weeks.
- The Department immediately placed all three children with a maternal aunt and later filed a combined dependency and termination petition against both parents, without offering a reunification case plan.
- At trial, the Department’s proof focused almost entirely on the infant’s injuries and the parents’ responsibility; there was little evidence about the two older children, and the record contained no evidence they had been abused or neglected.
- The guardian ad litem opposed termination as to all three children.
- The trial court terminated both parents’ rights as to all three children.

## Issues

1. Whether egregious physical abuse of the infant supported termination of both parents’ rights to the infant under Fla. Stat. § 39.806(1)(f) without a case plan.
2. Whether, as to the two older children, the Department proved by clear and convincing evidence that termination was (a) in their manifest best interests and (b) the least restrictive means to protect them, where the abuse evidence concerned the infant and little evidence addressed the siblings.

## Decision

- Affirmed termination of both parents’ rights as to the infant.
- Reversed termination of both parents’ rights as to the two older children.
- Remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- Under Fla. Stat. § 39.806(1)(f), parental rights may be terminated when a parent commits egregious conduct, or knowingly fails to prevent egregious conduct the parent had the opportunity and capability to prevent, where the conduct threatens the child or the child’s siblings.
- Even if a statutory ground for termination is proven, the State must prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s manifest best interests and is the least restrictive means of protecting the child.
- Egregious abuse of one child may justify termination as to that child, but termination as to siblings requires individualized proof meeting the manifest-best-interests and least-restrictive-means requirements.

## Conclusion

The court held that severe, repeated abuse of an infant constituted egregious conduct justifying termination of parental rights to that child, but it rejected termination as to the older siblings because the Department did not provide clear and convincing evidence that termination was in those children’s manifest best interests or the least restrictive means of protecting them.


In re K.A., 880 So. 2d 705 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 2004)