Utah Court of Appeals
Can parents raise ADA accommodation claims for the first time on appeal in termination cases? In re M.R. Explained
Summary
Mother appealed termination of parental rights, arguing DCFS failed to provide reasonable reunification services and that she was denied reasonable accommodations under the ADA. The juvenile court terminated mother’s parental rights after extensive services were provided, including psychological evaluations, therapy, and approximately seventy sessions of parent-child interactive therapy.
Analysis
Background and Facts
In In re M.R., a mother appealed the termination of her parental rights, challenging both the adequacy of reunification services and claiming she was denied reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). DCFS had provided extensive services including three psychological evaluations, drug testing, therapy, and approximately seventy sessions of weekly Individualized Parent Child Interactive Therapy with an interpreter. The psychological evaluators diagnosed mother with an intellectual disability that would make parenting difficult due to her inability to adapt learned concepts to new situations.
Key Legal Issues
The case presented two primary issues: whether DCFS provided reasonable reunification efforts and whether mother could raise an ADA reasonable accommodation claim for the first time on appeal. The court applied the clearly erroneous standard to factual findings and reviewed the adequacy of reunification services for abuse of discretion.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed the termination, finding the ADA claim was not preserved because mother never requested accommodations or objected that services failed to account for her disability. Citing In re K.C., the court held that juvenile courts have no obligation to examine ADA accommodations until parents actually “invoke” the ADA. Regarding reasonable efforts, the court found DCFS’s extensive services were adequate and tailored to address mother’s parenting deficiencies from multiple directions.
Practice Implications
This decision emphasizes the critical importance of preservation in termination proceedings. Practitioners representing parents with disabilities must specifically request ADA accommodations and object when services fail to adequately account for disabilities. The broad discretion afforded to juvenile courts in evaluating reasonable efforts means appellate challenges require clear evidence that services were inadequate or improperly tailored to the parent’s specific circumstances.
Case Details
Case Name
In re M.R.
Citation
2018 UT App 17
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20170211-CA
Date Decided
February 1, 2018
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
DCFS provided reasonable reunification services where extensive services were provided including evaluations, therapy, and parent-child interactive therapy sessions, and mother failed to preserve her ADA reasonable accommodation claim.
Standard of Review
Clearly erroneous for factual findings; abuse of discretion for whether DCFS made reasonable efforts at reunification
Practice Tip
Preserve ADA reasonable accommodation claims by specifically requesting accommodations in the trial court and objecting when services do not adequately account for disabilities.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.