In the Int. of: E.J.A., a Minor; Apl. of: T.M.A.

Summary

Justice Donohue dissents, arguing that the trial court’s termination of parental rights was not supported by clear and convincing evidence because it relied on a single caseworker’s testimony despite contradictory competent evidence. She contends that the statutory standards under 23 Pa.C.S. §§ 2511(a) and (b) were not met and that the appellate court should remand for further factual consideration. The dissent emphasizes the fundamental due‑process right of parents and the heightened burden of proof required for termination.