B.E.G. (Father) appealed the termination of parental rights to two minor children whom he sexually abused. The court of appeals affirmed.

Because he pled guilty to child molestation, Father was prohibited by section 211.038 R.S. Mo. from reuniting with the children after his release from prison. Nonetheless, he challenged the termination, claiming there was: insufficient evidence to support a finding of significant likelihood of future harm to the children; that there was no evidence termination was in the best interests of the children; that termination conflicted with other court orders in effect at the time of the termination; and that there were less drastic alternatives such as allowing the maternal grandmother who is caring for the children to seek a guardianship.

The court rejected all the claims. It noted that Father had already harmed the children and a continued relationship would mean continued harm. Because of this, termination was in the children's best interests and Father's speculations about a possible inheritance from a paternal great-grandmother did not change that fact. The termination was not in conflict with other court orders and the maternal grandmother was still free to seek guardianship of the children. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed. See: In the interest of: E.G.G. and E.E.G., Mo. Ct. App. - S. Dist., Nos. SD33822 and SD33823 (consolidated) (Decided January 29, 2016).

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

Related legal case