Vaidik, C.J.
Case Summary
A.M. (“Father”) appeals the trial court’s termination of his parental rights. Among other things, he argues that paternity was not established until four months before the termination proceedings and, as a result, the statutory requirement of removal from “the home” for fifteen of the most recent twenty two months cannot be met. Because we interpret “the home” to mean the home of the child and not the home of a particular parent, we affirm.
….
Second, it is undisputed that A.G. was removed from his home and placed by DCS with foster parents for eighteen consecutive months—his entire life— before the termination hearing. Appellant’s Br. p. 14. Father argues, however, that the duration of removal should be calculated based on the date that A.G. was removed from him. Specifically, he contends that “the date the child is removed from the home” should be read as requiring removal from Father’s home for the purpose of calculating the required fifteen months. I.C. § 31-35-2-4(b)(2)(A)(iii). We disagree and interpret the statute to refer to the child’s home in calculating the duration of removal, and not the home of a particular parent.
….
Finally, we do understand that there will be cases where the father will have less time to work with DCS as a result of adhering to the fifteen-month timeline. However, time is only one of four distinct statutory considerations in the termination proceeding. In cases where paternity is not immediately established, courts must also look to the other statutory requirements in Section 31-35-2-4(b)(2) to determine whether termination is appropriate, as we have done here. For example, a court may determine that it is in the best interests of a child not to terminate his relationship with his father to allow the father more time to remedy the conditions that resulted in the child’s removal.
In summary, the requirements of Subsection (A)(iii) were met. The trial court found that A.G. was removed from Father, and that A.G. had been under the supervision of DCS for more than fifteen of the most recent twenty-two months.
….
Affirmed.
Robb, J., and Pyle, J., concur.