Adrienne B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS

── Adrienne B. v. State of Alaska, DFCS, OCS ── Court: Alaska Supreme Court Date: April 15, 2026 Category: General NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this court do not create legal precedent. A party wishing to cite such a decision in a brief or at oral argument should review Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d). THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ADRIENNE B., ) ) Supreme Court No. S-19266 Appellant, ) ) Superior Court Nos. v. ) 3AN-20-00364/5CN, 3AN-23-00188CN ) (Consolidated) STATE OF ALASKA, DEPARTMENT ) OF FAMILY & COMMUNITY ) MEMORANDUM OPINION SERVICES, OFFICE OF ) AND JUDGMENT* CHILDREN’S SERVICES, ) ) No. 2141 – April 15, 2026 Appellee. ) ) Appeal from the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, Una S. Gandbhir, Judge. Appearances: Megan M. Rowe, Anchorage, for Appellant. Elizabeth Leduc, Assistant Attorney General, Anchorage, and Stephen Cox, Attorney General, Juneau, for Appellee. Olena Kalytiak Davis, Anchorage, and James Stinson, Public Advocate, Anchorage, for Guardian Ad Litem. Before: Borghesan, Henderson, Pate, and Oravec, Justices. [Carney, Chief Justice, not participating.] INTRODUCTION In 2020, the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) took custody of two children after investigating reports of drug abuse and domestic violence in the home of * Entered under Alaska Appellate Rule 214. Adrienne B. and Gordon L.1 After two years of minimal engagement by Adrienne with OCS and her case plan, OCS petitioned to terminate her parental rights.2 The superior court held a trial and denied the petition, ruling that because of caseworker turnover and the failure to follow up on assisting Adrienne with obtaining a psychological evaluation, OCS had not made reasonable efforts to reunify the family. OCS redoubled its efforts, assigning two caseworkers who both made efforts to connect Adrienne with mental health resources, drug treatment, and visitation with the children. Five months later, Adrienne gave birth to a third child, who tested positive for amphetamines. OCS took custody of this child and continued its reunification efforts. But Adrienne continued to engage only sporadically with OCS. After almost two years of improved efforts by OCS, the superior court granted its second petition to terminate Adrienne’s parental rights. Adrienne appeals all aspects of the court’s termination decision. Observing no error or clear error in the court’s decision, we affirm in full. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS Adrienne B. is the mother of three children at the center of this case: Yael, born in July 2017; Nova, born in June 2018; and Noah, born in May 2023. Gordon L. is the father of Yael and Nova. Noah’s father is unknown. A. OCS’s Involvement With The Family In 2018-2019 After Adrienne’s second child Nova was born in June 2018, a test of the umbilical cord came back positive for cocaine. Hair tests from Adrienne and her first 1 We use pseudonyms to protect the family’s privacy. 2 During subsequent proceedings, the father consented to adoption of the children. This appeal concerns only the mother, Adrienne. -2- 2141 child, Yael, were also positive. In response, OCS took emergency custody of both Yael and Nova and placed the children with their paternal grandmother. 3 Several months later, Adrienne entered inpatient substance ab