## Facts

- Mother was a 17-year-old juvenile who had previously been adjudicated delinquent and placed on probation.
- Mother lived in Norwalk, Ohio with her two daughters (about two years old and eight months old) in the home of the children’s maternal grandmother (Grandmother).
- A condition of Mother’s probation was that she not leave Grandmother’s home without Grandmother’s authorization.
- After an argument, Mother left Grandmother’s home without authorization, violating probation.
- Mother left the two-year-old child with Grandmother and took the eight-month-old child with her to Sandusky, Ohio.
- Before leaving, Mother did not make an agreement with Grandmother about caring for either child while Mother was gone.
- In Sandusky, Mother stayed at a residence described in testimony as a place where drugs were used.
- About one week after leaving, Mother sent the eight-month-old child back to Grandmother, and Grandmother then cared for both children.
- After Grandmother reported that Mother had run away, Mother was arrested in Sandusky.
- Following Mother’s arrest, the county human-services agency filed complaints alleging both children were dependent under Ohio’s dependency statute.
- The juvenile court adjudicated both children dependent and granted Grandmother legal custody.
- Mother appealed, arguing the dependency adjudications were against the manifest weight of the evidence because the children were always cared for and had necessities through Grandmother.

## Issues

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported adjudicating the children dependent under Ohio Rev. Code § 2151.04 when Mother left without permission, failed to arrange for the children’s care, and stayed in an unsafe setting.
2. Whether the children’s continuous day-to-day care by Grandmother defeated dependency where Mother did not provide or arrange adequate parental care.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the juvenile court’s adjudications of dependency and the grant of legal custody to Grandmother.
- The court concluded the record supported a finding that the children lacked adequate parental care based on Mother’s conduct, including leaving without authorization and without making a plan for the children’s care.
- The court rejected Mother’s argument that the children could not be dependent simply because Grandmother provided food, shelter, and supervision.
- The court noted it was “curious” that the agency proceeded only on dependency rather than also filing a neglect complaint, but held the dependency findings were still supported by the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Dependency must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.
- A dependency inquiry centers on whether the child is receiving adequate parental care, not only on whether a relative happened to supply temporary housing and necessities.
- A parent’s failure to provide for, supervise, or meaningfully arrange care for a child can support a dependency adjudication even when a capable family member steps in.
- On manifest-weight review, an appellate court will uphold a dependency adjudication where the record contains evidence that permits the trier of fact to form a firm belief that statutory dependency elements are met.

## Conclusion

The dependency adjudications and award of legal custody to the grandmother were affirmed because the evidence showed Mother left the home in violation of probation, placed herself in an unsafe drug-associated setting, and failed to make arrangements for her children’s care, permitting the juvenile court to find by clear and convincing evidence that the children lacked adequate parental care under Ohio’s dependency statute.


In re Tikyra A., 659 N.E.2d 867 (1995)