In re Adoption of J.G., 2024 IL App (4th) 240731-U

- Case citation and parties
In re Adoption of J.G., 2024 IL App (4th) 240731-U (4th Dist. Sept. 12, 2024) (Rule 23 non‑precedential). Petitioners/Appellees: John B. (stepfather) & Katie G. (biological mother). Respondent/Appellant: Richard G. (biological father).

- Key legal issues
1) Whether respondent was unfit as a parent (grounds alleged included depravity, substantial neglect, habitual drug addiction, failure to support/visit).
2) Whether termination of respondent’s parental rights and adoption by petitioners was in the minor’s best interest.
3) Whether appointed appellate counsel properly may withdraw under Anders when no meritorious appellate issue exists.

- Holding / outcome
The appellate court granted appellate counsel’s Anders motion to withdraw and affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The trial court’s findings that respondent was unfit by reason of depravity and substantial neglect and that termination was in the child’s best interest were upheld. The court found insufficient evidence of habitual addiction to support that separate ground.

- Significant legal reasoning (concise)
- Unfitness: The trial court’s finding of depravity relied on certified prior felony convictions (multiple felonies, including one within five years of the petition) and respondent’s overall criminal history. Substantial neglect was supported by evidence of prior substance abuse, repeated incarceration, missed/declined parenting time, and the child’s understandable refusal to continue visits. The court rejected other alleged grounds where proof was lacking (e.g., habitual drug addiction).
- Best interest: The minor (age 15) testified she had lived with petitioners for years, referred to John as “dad,” wanted adoption, and felt unsafe or uncomfortable around respondent due to his drinking/partying. The guardian ad litem recommended termination and adoption. The trial court emphasized stability and the deterioration of the parent–child relationship due to respondent’s conduct.
- Anders procedure: Appellate counsel reviewed the record, identified and rejected potential manifest‑weight arguments, filed the Anders motion and brief, served the client, and the court concluded no arguable issues merited appeal, permitting counsel’s withdrawal.

- Practice implications
- Prove deprivation/depravity with certified conviction records and timeline details; establish substantial neglect with evidence of incarceration, missed visits, substance use impacting parenting, and child testimony.
- Child preference (especially older minors) and GAL recommendations carry significant weight in best‑interest determinations.
- Plead alternative unfitness grounds carefully—courts will dismiss grounds lacking clear proof.
- On appeal, Anders procedure applies in parental‑rights cases (see In re S.M. cited); appellate counsel must thoroughly review the record, brief potential issues, serve the client, and the court may permit withdrawal if no arguable claim exists.