Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In Re F.M., A Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. v. M.A

April 25, 2011

IN RE F.M., A PERSON COMING UNDER THE JUVENILE COURT LAW.
EL DORADO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
M.A., DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
IN RE J.F. ET AL., PERSONS COMING UNDER THE JUVENILE COURT LAW.
EL DORADO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
v.
M.A., DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.



(Super. Ct. No. PDP20090103) (Super. Ct. Nos. PDP20080059, PDP20080060, PDP20080061)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hull, J.

In re F.M.

CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COPY

Appellant, mother of minors J.F., F.F., A.F., and F.M., appeals from the juvenile court's orders terminating her parental rights and freeing the minors for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395; undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.) She contends the juvenile court erred in concluding the beneficial relationship exception to termination of her parental rights did not apply. We affirm the orders.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

In June 2008, El Dorado County Department of Human Services (the Department) filed section 300 petitions on behalf of appellant's three sons, J.F. (age three) and twins A.F. and F.F. (age two), alleging appellant was unable to adequately act as their parent due to her significant substance abuse problem. A petition was also filed on behalf of the minors' older sister, I.F., however, she is not a subject of this appeal. The court took jurisdiction and all four children were detained. I.F. was placed with the maternal grandmother. Appellant's three sons were placed in foster care. Appellant visited the minors twice a week for a total of four hours a week.

In November 2008, J.F. was returned to appellant's care and, thereafter, twins A.F. and F.F. began weekend visits with appellant. Appellant gave birth to a fourth son, F.M., in March 2009. In June 2009, A.F. and F.F. were also returned to appellant's care.

In August 2009, new petitions were filed, on behalf of all of appellant's children, alleging appellant had improperly administered medication to F.M., requiring emergency medical care, and had failed to protect F.M. from a domestic violence dispute. The children were detained and placed in foster care.

Appellant's four sons were returned to her care in October 2009; however, in December 2009, a new petition was filed on behalf of the children alleging appellant had relapsed into substance abuse. The children were again detained and placed in foster care.

Appellant visited the children four times a week for two hours each visit, and had telephone contact with the children. She failed, however, to reunify with the children and reunification services were terminated in January 2010.

The social worker reported the children were healthy, with no developmental problems. Visitations were regular and went well. The four boys were living in a six-bedroom home with qualified prospective adoptive parents. The social worker recommended parental rights be terminated as to the boys and that they be freed for adoption. The social worker recommended permanent guardianship for I.F., who remained placed with the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.