interests hearing in Illinois

2024App. 3d 766, 772 (2002). “[A]t a best interests hearing, the parent’s interest in maintaining the parent-child relationship must yield to the child’s interest in a stable, loving home life.” In re D.T., 212 Ill. 2d 347, 364 (2004).

2023In this case, no argument regarding Sade’s fitness was raised, and therefore, we move to the second stage. ¶ 36 At the best interests hearing “the parent’s interest in maintaining the parent-child relationship must yield to the child’s interest in a stable, loving home life.” In re D.T., 212 Ill. 2d 347 , 364 (2004).

2010See In re G.L., 329 Ill.App.3d 18 , 25, 263 Ill.Dec. 607 , 768 N.E.2d 367 (2002).

2010See In re G.L., 329 Ill.App.3d 18 , 25, 263 Ill.Dec. 607 , 768 N.E.2d 367 (2002).

2014In re Lakita B., 297 Ill.

2014In re Lakita B., 297 Ill.

2025At the best interests hearing, the formal rules of evidence do not apply, but rather, “all evidence helpful (in the court’s judgment) in determining the questions before the court may be admitted and may be relied upon to the extent of its probative value, even though that evidence would not be admissible in a proceeding where the formal rules of evidence applied.” In re Jay H., 395 Ill.

2025At the best interests hearing, the formal rules of evidence do not apply, but rather, “all evidence helpful (in the court’s judgment) in determining the questions before the court may be admitted and may be relied upon to the extent of its probative value, even though that evidence would not be admissible in a proceeding where the formal rules of evidence applied.” In re Jay H., 395 Ill.

2001In re J.T.C., 273 Ill.App.3d 193 , 200, 209 Ill.Dec. 881 , 652 N.E.2d 421, 426 (1995); In re A.P., 277 Ill.App.3d 593 , 600, *331 214 Ill.Dec. 299 , 660 N.E.2d 1006, 1012 (1996).

2000Termination is only allowed after a separate best interests hearing ( In re A.P., 277 Ill.App.3d 593 , 600, 214 Ill.

2004The cases relied upon by respondent in support of her position that the Report is only admissible with respect to a best interests hearing, In re D.T., 338 Ill.

2004The cases relied upon by respondent in support of her position that the Report is only admissible with respect to a best interests hearing, In re D.T., 338 Ill.App.3d 133 , 272 Ill.Dec. 829 , 788 N.E.2d 133 (2003), and In re C.B., 248 Ill.App.3d 168 , 188 Ill.Dec. 28 , 618 N.E.2d 598 (1993), do not aid her.

2002See D.L., 191 Ill.2d at 12-13 , 245 Ill.Dec. 256 , 727 N.E.2d 990 (holding that where the parent was found unfit under section 1(D)(m), evidence of the parent's more recent conduct occurring outside the relevant statutory period may be introduced at the best interests hearing); In re Adoption of D.A., 222 Ill.App.3d 73, 79-80 , 164 Ill.Dec. *1117 696, 583 N.E.2d 612 (1991) (holding that a parent's departure from a lengthy period of objectionable conduct does not eliminate the existence of grounds for determination that the parent is unfit; instead, it is a factor to consider at the best intere

2002See D.L., 191 Ill.2d at 12-13 , 245 Ill.Dec. 256 , 727 N.E.2d 990 (holding that where the parent was found unfit under section 1(D)(m), evidence of the parent's more recent conduct occurring outside the relevant statutory period may be introduced at the best interests hearing); In re Adoption of D.A., 222 Ill.App.3d 73, 79-80 , 164 Ill.Dec. *1117 696, 583 N.E.2d 612 (1991) (holding that a parent's departure from a lengthy period of objectionable conduct does not eliminate the existence of grounds for determination that the parent is unfit; instead, it is a factor to consider at the best intere

2019App. 3d 275, 288 , 885 N.E.2d 1120, 1134 (2008). ¶ 67 The record indicates that the best interests hearing and the trial court’s ruling encompassed Inez’s entire life, not just her recent adulthood, which is when Martin petitioned for visitation.

2018App. 3d 275 , 288, 319 Ill.Dec. 440 , 885 N.E.2d 1120 , 1134 (2008). ¶ 67 The record indicates that the best interests hearing and the trial court's ruling encompassed Inez's entire life, not just her recent adulthood, which is when Martin petitioned for visitation.

2025See In re Julian K., 2012 IL App (1st) 112841, ¶¶ 82-84 . ¶ 90 Respondent also contends that Z.S. “would clearly be harmed if that contact were to cease.” There is no reason to think that Z.S.’s contact with respondent will cease when his foster parents - 22 - No. 1-25-0228 adopt him.

2025See In re Julian K., 2012 IL App (1st) 112841, ¶¶ 82-84 . ¶ 91 Respondent also contends that Z.S. “would clearly be harmed if that contact were to cease.” There is no reason to think that Z.S.’s contact with respondent will cease when his foster parents adopt him.

2024In re Arthur H., 212 Ill. 2d 441, 462 (2004); 705 ILCS 405/1- 1 et seq.

2024In re Arthur H., 212 Ill. 2d 441, 462 (2004); 705 ILCS 405/1- 1 et seq.

2024See People v. Lee, 2016 IL App (2d) 150359, ¶ 14 (appellate court reviews the trial court’s judgment, not its reasoning, and can affirm on any basis supported by the record).

2024See People v. Lee, 2016 IL App (2d) 150359, ¶ 14 (appellate court reviews the trial court’s judgment, not its reasoning, and can affirm on any - 24 - No. 1-23-2041 basis supported by the record).

2021App. 3d 682, 686 , 850 N.E.2d 327, 331 (2006). ¶ 26 In this case, the best interests factors all favor termination of respondent’s parental rights.

2020App. 3d 682, 686 , 850 N.E.2d 327, 331 (2006). ¶ 34 In this case, the best interests factors all favor termination of respondent’s parental rights.

2008People v. Rudi, 103 Ill. 2d 216, 223 , 469 N.E.2d 580, 583-84 (1984); People v. Collins, 214 Ill.

2008People v. Rudi, 103 Ill. 2d 216, 223 , 469 N.E.2d 580, 583-84 (1984); People v. Collins, 214 Ill.

2004See In re B.C., 317 Ill.App.3d 607, 614 , 251 Ill.Dec. 211 , 740 N.E.2d 41 (2000); In re G.L., 329 Ill.App.3d 18 , 25, 263 Ill.Dec. 607 , 768 N.E.2d 367 (2002).

2004See In re B.C., 317 Ill.App.3d 607, 614 , 251 Ill.Dec. 211 , 740 N.E.2d 41 (2000); In re G.L., 329 Ill.App.3d 18 , 25, 263 Ill.Dec. 607 , 768 N.E.2d 367 (2002).

2025In re Tajannah O., 2014 IL App (1st) 133119, ¶ 19 . ¶ 49 The evidence presented at the best interests hearing was more than sufficient to support the circuit court’s finding that termination of Father’s rights was in Ethan’s best interest.

2025In re Tajannah O., 2014 IL App (1st) 133119, ¶ 19 . ¶ 68 Respondent also argues that the trial court erred when it limited her presentation of evidence about the services she was continuing to receive at the time of the best interests hearing.

2024The foster parents’ commitment to maintaining the siblings’ relationships with each other also favors termination of parental rights and adoption. ¶ 78 Destiny S. relies on In re B.B., 386 Ill.

2011App.3d at 697-98 , 326 Ill.Dec. 252 , 899 N.E.2d 469 . ¶ 34 During the best interests hearing, the parent's interest in maintaining the parent-child relationship must yield to the child's interest to live in a stable, permanent, loving home.

2021The State has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in the child’s best interests. [Citation.] The court’s determination in this respect lies within its 25 sound discretion, especially when it considers the credibility of testimony presented at the best interests hearing; that determination will not be reversed unless it is against the manifest weight of the evidence or the trial court has abused its discretion. [Citation.] ‘A finding is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident.’ [Citation.]” In re Dea

2012In re Deandre D., 405 Ill.

2011People v. Naylor, 229 Ill.2d 584, 603 , 323 Ill.Dec. 381 , 893 N.E.2d 653 (2008). ¶ 29 On appeal, father does not challenge the court's finding of unfitness as improper or state how the conversation, if overheard, affected the outcome of the best interests hearing.

2011People v. Naylor, 229 Ill.2d 584, 603 , 323 Ill.Dec. 381 , 893 N.E.2d 653 (2008). ¶ 29 On appeal, father does not challenge the court's finding of unfitness as improper or state how the conversation, if overheard, affected the outcome of the best interests hearing.

2008People v. Rudi, 103 Ill. 2d 216, 223 , 469 N.E.2d 580, 583-84 (1984); People v. Collins, 214 Ill.

2008People v. Rudi, 103 Ill.2d 216, 223 , 82 Ill.Dec. 936 , 469 N.E.2d 580, 583-84 (1984); People v. Collins, 214 Ill.App.3d 98, 104 , 157 Ill.Dec. 928 , 573 N.E.2d 346, 350 (1991).