## Facts

- T.W. (Mother) was the natural mother of premature twin children born in June 2000; she was also raising three other young children while working and felt overwhelmed.
- Mother initially decided to pursue adoption so the twins could have “a better life,” but she remained actively involved with the twins’ care, including daily hospital visits, providing expressed breast milk, taking a class on caring for premature infants, and providing intensive care after discharge.
- Mother attempted to place the twins for adoption first with a California family and later with a British family; the British adoption was pursued in Arkansas and was later set aside for lack of jurisdiction.
- After the adoption failed, the twins were returned to Missouri and placed in the custody of the Division of Family Services (DFS).
- Mother decided to raise the twins and, while they were in DFS custody, complied with a comprehensive DFS parenting plan that included parenting classes, visitation, financial support, and drug screening.
- A juvenile officer petitioned to terminate Mother’s parental rights under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 211.447.
- The trial court terminated Mother’s parental rights, citing abuse/neglect, failure to rectify, and unfitness grounds, and concluding termination was in the children’s best interests.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court’s written findings were sufficient, and supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, to terminate parental rights under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 211.447.4(2), (3), and (6).
2. Whether the trial court was required to consider and make findings on each mandatory statutory factor and subdivision supporting the grounds for termination and the best-interests determination under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 211.447.6.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Missouri reversed the termination judgment and remanded.
- The Court held the trial court’s findings were insufficiently specific and, in material respects, did not show how the evidence satisfied the statutory elements by clear, cogent, and convincing proof.
- The Court ruled that the trial court did not adequately connect Mother’s past conduct—principally her adoption efforts while overwhelmed—to a present risk of harm or a likelihood of future harm.
- The Court directed that if termination is again pursued on remand, the trial court must make findings on each required statutory subdivision or factor for every termination ground relied upon, and must support the best-interests determination with the required factor findings.

## Legal Principles

- Termination of parental rights is an extreme remedy permitted only when statutory grounds are proven by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence and termination is in the child’s best interests.
- A juvenile court must make specific written findings on each statutory factor or subdivision it relies on to support each invoked ground for termination and the best-interests determination.
- Past conduct may support termination only if convincingly linked to predicted future behavior; the court must explicitly consider whether past acts indicate a likelihood of future harm.
- Conclusory findings, or findings that do not connect evidence to statutory elements and required factors, are insufficient to sustain termination on appeal.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Missouri reversed termination because the trial court’s judgment lacked the required statutory, factor-by-factor findings and did not establish by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence that Mother’s prior adoption attempts and past circumstances predicted future harm or current unfitness, requiring remand for proceedings consistent with the statutory findings requirements.


In re K.A.W., 133 S.W.3d 1 (Mo. 2004)