## Facts

- Oregon’s State Office of Services for Children and Families filed petitions to terminate Mother’s and Father’s parental rights, alleging they were not feeding their infant daughters (triplets) enough.
- When the triplets were about nine months old, they were underweight compared to what was expected based on their individual histories, and their growth patterns were declining on standardized growth charts.
- By twelve months, the decline had worsened. The physician focused on each child’s slowing head-circumference growth rate, which the physician associated with severe nutritional deficiency.
- The treating physician diagnosed the triplets with nonorganic failure to thrive due to inadequate nutrition.
- The diagnosis was supported by evidence that the children absorbed nutrition and gained weight when placed in an environment where they received proper nutrition.
- After being notified, the state provided intensive services for more than a year, including in-home instruction and support on feeding methods, nutrition, and feeding schedules.
- Even with these services, the triplets improved only intermittently and “thrived sporadically.”
- At the termination hearing, medical witnesses testified that the children’s continued failure to grow, including reduced head-circumference growth, created a risk of permanent developmental delay.
- Although the triplets were naturally small like their parents, a specialist testified that the nonorganic failure-to-thrive diagnosis still fit, even accounting for hereditary size.
- The children were often sick, but no expert identified illness as the cause of the growth problems.
- Evidence showed the parents had difficulty providing enough nutrition and did not consistently follow guidance about feeding, nutrition, or schedules.
- Testimony also described mental-health diagnoses that made it hard for Mother to use the instruction provided and made Father resistant to outside help.
- The juvenile court dismissed the termination petitions, concluding the state had not shown a prima facie case for termination.

## Issues

1. Whether the state’s evidence was sufficient to make a prima facie showing, under Oregon’s termination statutes, that the parents were unfit by conduct or condition seriously harmful to the children and that return to the parents’ home was unlikely within a reasonable time.
2. Whether the juvenile court erred by dismissing the termination petitions despite medical and other evidence linking the children’s nonorganic failure to thrive to inadequate nutrition in the parents’ care and the parents’ limited progress after extensive services.

## Decision

- The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the juvenile court’s dismissal of the termination petitions.
- The court held that the state presented enough evidence to establish a prima facie case for termination.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Termination of parental rights requires proof (by clear and convincing evidence at the merits stage) that the parent is unfit by reason of conduct or condition seriously detrimental to the child and that the child’s return to the parent’s home is improbable within a reasonable time because the conduct or condition is unlikely to change.
- At the prima facie stage, dismissal is improper when the state presents evidence that, if believed, would support the statutory grounds for termination.
- Medical proof that a child has nonorganic failure to thrive, together with evidence the child gains weight and processes nutrition when properly fed in another setting, supports an inference that inadequate nutrition in the home is the cause.
- Evidence that intensive, sustained services were provided and the child’s growth improved only intermittently can support a finding that the harmful conditions are unlikely to be corrected within a reasonable time.
- Expert testimony that continued poor growth—especially reduced head-circumference growth—creates a risk of permanent developmental delay supports the “seriously detrimental” element of parental unfitness.
- Evidence about parents’ ability to use offered help, including mental-health conditions affecting follow-through and receptiveness to assistance, is relevant to whether safe reunification is likely within a reasonable time.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals concluded that the state’s evidence—showing the triplets’ nonorganic failure to thrive from inadequate nutrition, improvement when properly fed outside the home, ongoing failure to consistently follow feeding guidance despite extensive in-home services, and expert testimony about the risk of permanent developmental delay—was enough to establish a prima facie case for termination, so the juvenile court’s dismissal was reversed and the matter was remanded.


In re Mendez, 986 P.2d 670 (1999)