Utah Court of Appeals
Does permanent guardianship satisfy the requirement to consider alternatives to termination? In re A.R. Explained
Summary
Father appealed a juvenile court’s award of permanent custody and guardianship of his children to their paternal grandmother, arguing that In re B.T.B. required the court to preserve the possibility of rehabilitation and future restoration of custody. The court held that permanent guardianship with retained visitation rights constitutes a proper alternative to termination under B.T.B.
Analysis
In In re A.R., the Utah Court of Appeals clarified that permanent guardianship arrangements can satisfy the requirement under In re B.T.B. to consider alternatives to termination of parental rights, even when they do not preserve the possibility of future custody restoration.
Background and Facts
The case involved three children whose father suffered from untreated mental illness rendering him unfit as a parent. While the Guardian ad Litem petitioned to terminate Father’s parental rights for adoption purposes, the State advocated for permanent custody and guardianship to the paternal grandmother, with whom the children had resided throughout the child welfare proceedings. Father supported this arrangement and his counsel specifically requested permanent guardianship over termination.
Key Legal Issues
On appeal, Father argued that In re B.T.B. required the juvenile court to make any custody arrangement temporary to preserve the possibility of rehabilitation and future restoration of custody. The central issue was whether permanent guardianship satisfied B.T.B.’s mandate to consider alternatives to termination.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The court first noted that Father failed to preserve this issue for appeal, having specifically advocated for permanent guardianship at trial. More substantively, the court held that Father misinterpreted B.T.B. The decision clarified that B.T.B. “simply stands for the proposition that juvenile courts must consider or explore alternatives to termination” before finding termination “strictly necessary.” Permanent guardianship arrangements that preserve some form of parent-child relationship, including visitation rights, constitute valid alternatives even without restoration possibilities.
Practice Implications
This decision provides important guidance on preservation of error in juvenile proceedings and clarifies the scope of B.T.B.’s requirements. Practitioners should note that advocacy positions at trial can preclude inconsistent arguments on appeal, and that permanent guardianship arrangements satisfying some preservation of the parent-child relationship meet B.T.B.’s mandate for considering alternatives to termination.
Case Details
Case Name
In re A.R.
Citation
2019 UT App 81
Court
Utah Court of Appeals
Case Number
No. 20190245-CA
Date Decided
May 16, 2019
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
Permanent guardianship that preserves parental visitation rights satisfies the requirement to consider alternatives to termination of parental rights under In re B.T.B.
Standard of Review
Deference to juvenile court’s custody and guardianship determinations when supported by well-articulated reasons
Practice Tip
When advocating for a specific remedy at trial, avoid taking inconsistent positions on appeal, as failure to preserve issues through specific objections at the juvenile court level can bar appellate review.
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.