Cited by

“[T]he district court must consider the child’s best interests and explain why termination is in the best interests of the child.” Id.; d 623, 626 (Minn. App. 2003) (stating that failure to make a specific finding on the best interests of the children is reversible error).

is in the best interests of the child.” -26 (Minn. App. 2003) (recognizing that “a child’s best interests may preclude terminating parental rights” even when a statutory basis for termination exists (quotation omitted)).

See, (remanding because of an absence of district court findings on the best interests of the children in a TPR case).

In d 623 (Minn. App. 2003), we granted appellate relief because the district court’s order did 8 not contain any findings or conclusions concerning the children’s best interests.

16 district court’s findings.” J.K.T., d at 92 (d 623, 625 (Minn. App. 2003)).

“[W]hen the findings do not adequately address best interests, they are inadequate to facilitate effective appellate review, to provide insight into which facts or opinions were most persuasive of the ultimate decision, or to demonstrate the court’s comprehensive consideration of the statutory criteria.” (quotation omitted).

“[A] child’s best interests may preclude terminating parental rights even when a statutory basis for termination exists.” -26 (Minn. App. 2003) (quotation omitted).

of Tanghe, but mother misinterprets the rule in Tanghe to assert that the children’s interests in remaining with their mother outweigh anything else.

“Because the best-interests analysis involves credibility determinations and is ‘generally not susceptible to an appellate court’s global review of a record,’ we give considerable deference to the district court’s findings.” J.K.T., d at 92 (-26 (Minn. App. 2003)).

The district court must explain its rationale “for concluding why the termination is in the best interests of the children.”

Because a determination of a child’s best interests “is generally not susceptible to an appellate court’s global review of a record” and involves credibility determinations, the district court must “explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.” -26 (Minn. App. 2003).

The district court “must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.”

because it involves credibility determinations.”

of Tanghe, (holding that the district court must consider a child’s best interests and explain the reasoning for its decision to terminate parental rights in a TPR proceeding).

‘an appellate court’s combing through the record to determine best interests is inappropriate because it involves credibility determinations.’” In re Welfare of Child of 9 D.L.D., ().

‘an appellate court’s combing through the record to determine best intere sts is inappropriate because it involves credibility determinations.’” (); T.D., d at 555 ( providing that this cour t defers to district court ’s “determinations of witness credibility and the weight to be given to the evidence”).

unless manifestly and palpably contrary to the evidence as a whole.” (quotation omitted); (holding that determination of a child’s best interests is not susceptible to an appellate court’s global review of the record because the district court is best placed to make credibility determinations with regard to best interests).

‘an appellate court’s combing through the record to determine best interests is inappropriate because it involves credibility determinations.’” D.L.D., d at 546 ().

See In re Tanghe , (remanding a termination-of-parental-rights case for failure to make specific findings on the best interests of the children); In re Welfare of Child of J.R.R.

A district court “must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.”

“Because the best-interests analysis involves credibility determinations and is ‘generally not susceptible to an appellate court’s global review of a record,’ we give c onsiderable deference to the district court’s findings.” J.K.T., d at 93 ().

at 547; see In re Tanghe , ( stating that “the district court, in a termination proceeding, must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions,” and remanding for the failure to do so).

In determining whether termination is in a child’s best interests, the district court must “explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.” In re Tanghe , d 623, 626 (Minn. App. 2003).

(d 99, 105 (Minn. 1989)); see also In re Welfare of Child of D.L.D.

In determining whether termination is in a child’s best interests, the district court must “explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.”

‘an appellate court’s combing through the record to determine best interests is inappropriate because it involves credibility determinations.’” ().

See, 20 (remanding to the district cour t to “explain its rationale” when it made no findings about the children’s best in terest).

d 538, 547 (Minn. App. 2009); 14 (noting that a child’s best interests are “generally not susceptible to an appellate court’s global review of a record” ); (noting, on appeal of a custody award, that findings of fact explaining a district court’s

‘an appellate court’s combing through the record to determine best intere sts is inappropriate because it involves credibility determinations.’” ().

Instead, the district court “must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.” In re Tanghe

explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.” In re Tanghe

However, “the district court, in a termination proceeding, must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.”

d not abuse its discretion in determining that the children’s best interests outweigh mother’s and are best 4 The district court credited the guardian ad litem’s testimony, noting that her opinions were “well-founded and supported by the facts.” A determination of the best interests of a child involves credib ility determinations, In re Tanghe , and this court defers to the cred ibility determinations of the district court

The district court “must consider a child’s best in terests and explain its rationa le in its findings and conclusions.”

The district court “must consider a child’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclus ions.” In re Tanghe

A district court “must consider a child ’s best interests and explain its rationale in its findings and conclusions.” see also Minn. R. Juv.