The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently reminded trial courts that before terminating a parent’s right to their child, they must analyze the parent’s bond with the child. Where the parent and child share positive, consistent visits and the child has expressed their desire to remain with the parent, the court must assess whether a termination would harm the child more than help.
In the Interest of R.F., 2025 Pa. Super 200 (Sept 10, 2025)
R.F., born in August 2018, was placed with Paternal Grandmother in May 2023 after concerns about the Parents’ substance abuse and drug-related activities. Mom tested positive for meth and fentanyl, and R.F. was adjudicated dependent in October 2023. R.F. was placed in foster care until December 2024, when he was returned to Paternal Grandmother, who was a pre-adoptive resource. CYS ordered Mom to complete drug and alcohol evaluations as part of her compliance plan, but she consistently failed drug screenings or failed to appear for the drug test. Mom was also allowed supervised visits, which were overwhelmingly positive and became the focus point of reversal of the termination of parental rights.
At the termination hearing, testimony was presented by the Visitation Supervisor, the Paternal Grandmother, and the Child himself about the connection between Mom and child. The Visitation Supervisor testified that the visits were “overwhelmingly positive” and that Mom “gave her all” at every visit she witnessed. The Supervisor also testified that the child also eagerly sought a hug from Mom at every arrival and departure from the supervised visits. Paternal Grandmother described how R.F. was always excited for his visits, frequently talked about his Mother, and often asked when he could return home. The grandmother further testified that the visits went well and that R.F. benefited emotionally from the continued contact. She believed that R.F. needed more time with his Mother, not less, and warned that stopping their contact would be detrimental to his well-being. Finally, R.F. expressed a desire to remain with Mom consistently.
23 Pa.C.S. § 2511
The involuntary termination of parental rights is governed by Section 2511 of the Adoption Act, which calls for a bifurcated analysis that first focuses upon the “eleven enumerated grounds” of parental conduct that may warrant termination. R.F. 2025 Pa. Super 200 at 8; 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(a)(1)-(11). If the orphan’s court determines the petitioner [agency] has established grounds for termination under one of these subsections by “clear and convincing evidence”, the court then assesses the petition pursuant to Section 2511(b), which focuses upon the child’s developmental, physical, and emotional needs and welfare. R.F. 2025 Pa. Super 200 at 8; In re T.S.M., 620 Pa. 602, 71 A.3d 251, 267 (Pa. 2013); see also 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 2511(b). The court has found that “one major aspect of the needs and welfare analysis concerns the nature and status of the emotional bond between parent and child, with close attention paid to the effect on the child of permanently severing any such bond.” In re L.M., 2007 PA Super 120, 923 A.2d 505, 511 (Pa.Super. 2007).
` The Problem: Trial Court Ignored the Child’s Emotional Connection
For parents and caregivers, In the Interest of R.F. is an important reminder that your relationship with your child matters in court. Even if there are setbacks with treatment, housing, or compliance, consistent visitation, positive interactions, and your child’s emotional connection to you can make a critical difference. This does not mean that the emotional connection with the child will completely outweigh the other factors, but the emotional connection is also a part of the analysis. Documenting progress, attending visits, and maintaining open communication with caseworkers and providers can help ensure that the court fully considers the bond before making life-changing decisions.
For kinship caregivers, like grandparents or relatives, it’s equally important to share observations about the child’s attachment, behavior, and emotional needs, especially if continued contact with the parent benefits the child’s well-being. In R.F.’s case, the Paternal Grandmother was able to give a credible testimony that played a role in Mom retaining her parental rights. Positive testimony will play a role in these cases, and making progress in the compliance and treatment plans ordered by the court will more than likely produce that positive testimony.
You don’t have to face CYS alone
If the court or CYS is moving to terminate parental rights or change a child’s goal to adoption without considering the bond between parent and child, contact our firm immediately for a case evaluation. We will review the record, work with visitation supervisors and caregivers to document the relationship, and ensure the court fully considers your child’s emotional needs before making a final decision. If you or someone you care for sounds like the family in In the Interest of R.F., please reach out today to protect your rights and your relationship with your child.
Recent Comments