In re Eden F
In In re Eden F., 250 Conn. 674, 741 A.2d 873 (1999) the Court held that "pursuant to 17a-112 (b), the trial court was authorized to terminate parental rights upon a showing, by clear and convincing evidence, first, that one or more of the four scenarios set forth in 17a-112 (b) had been proven, and second, that the termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the child.
Although 17a-112 (d) (1) and (2) formerly 17-112 (e) (1) and (2) mandated that the trial court make written findings regarding the timeliness, nature, extent and reasonableness of the efforts made to reunify parent and child, 17a-112 contained nothing to indicate that any such finding was a prerequisite to the termination of parental rights.
Thus, when the petitions in this case were filed, the factors to be considered under 17a-112 (d) formerly 17a-112 (e) served only to guide the trial court in making its ultimate decision whether to grant the termination petition. . . . Thus, the fact that the legislature had interpolated objective guidelines into the open-ended fact-oriented statutes which govern parental termination disputes . . . should not be construed as a predetermined weighing of evidence . . . by the legislature. Where . . . the record reveals that the trial court's ultimate conclusions regarding termination of parental rights are supported by clear and convincing evidence, we will not reach an opposite conclusion on the basis of any one segment of the many factors considered in a termination proceeding . . ."