The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mauro , J.
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
P.M. and J.M., the de facto parents of four-year-old C.R. (minor), appeal from a disposition order of the Yolo County Juvenile Court directing that minor's mother receive reunification services.
On appeal, the de facto parents contend there was insufficient evidence that (1) mother had made reasonable efforts to overcome her drug abuse and mental health problems, (2) she had not resisted drug treatment, and (3) reunification services were in minor's best interest.
We conclude that the de facto parents' contentions lack merit. We will affirm the judgment.
On October 3, 2010, mother was arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance. Minor and one of his siblings*fn1 were with mother at the time of the arrest. Law enforcement released the children to their godparents. The next day, the godmother contacted the Yolo County Department of Employment and Social Services (Department) and expressed concern that mother would try to retrieve the children. In response, the Department placed the children in protective custody.
On October 6, 2010, a petition was filed alleging that minor came within juvenile court jurisdiction due to mother's inability to care for minor and her abuse or neglect of three siblings. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subds. (b), (j).)*fn2
At the detention hearing the following day, the juvenile court appointed counsel for mother who was not present. Counsel advised that mother had been involuntarily hospitalized the previous day. Mother had a history of mental illness as reflected in her child welfare history. The juvenile court made the appropriate findings and orders for detention and scheduled a jurisdiction hearing.
On November 3, 2010, the juvenile court appointed a guardian ad litem for mother.
Due primarily to mother's mental health instability, the jurisdiction hearing was continued on four occasions and was conducted on December 1, 2010. Mother pleaded no contest to the petition as amended and the juvenile court made the appropriate findings and orders for jurisdiction. A disposition hearing was scheduled for December 15, 2010.
At the December 15, 2010 hearing, the juvenile court granted the petition by the foster parents for de facto parent status over the objections of mother and the Department. The disposition hearing was continued to January 4, 2011.
The de facto parents requested a contested hearing on the Department's recommendation to provide family reunification services to mother. The hearing was conducted on February 3, 10, and 28, 2011. The juvenile court ordered that mother receive family reunification services.
The juvenile court found by clear and convincing evidence that the statutory predicates for bypass of reunification services pursuant to section 361.5,*fn3 subdivisions (b)(10) (prior termination of reunification services), (b)(11) (prior severance of parental rights), and (b)(13) (history of extensive, abusive, and chronic use of drugs or alcohol), had been satisfied in that another one of minor's siblings had been removed from mother, and mother's parental rights to that sibling had been terminated, due to mother's failure to successfully complete a ...