In re Mariah T.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed 10/1/13  In re Mariah T. CA4/1

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

>NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

> 

 

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  This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115>.

 

COURT
OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

 

DIVISION
ONE

 

STATE
OF CALIFORNIA

 

 

 
>

In re MARIAH T., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY,               Plaintiff and Respondent,               v.   P.A.,               Defendant and Appellant.	D063920       (Super. Ct. No. J516163C)

 

            APPEAL from
an order of the Superior Court
of href="http://www.adrservices.org/neutrals/frederick-mandabach.php">San Diego
County, Laura J. Birkmeyer, Judge.  Affirmed.

 

            Neale B.
Gold, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

            Thomas E.
Montgomery, County Counsel, John E. Philips, Chief Deputy County Counsel and
Lisa M. Maldonado, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

            P.A.
appeals a juvenile court order denying her reunification
services in the dependency case of her daughter, Mariah T.  She contends the court reversibly erred
because it would be in Mariah's best interests to provide reunification
services to her.  We affirm the order.

FACTUAL AND
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

            On March 6,
2013, the San Diego County Health and
Human Services Agency (the Agency) petitioned on behalf of newborn Mariah
under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b),href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1" title="">[1]
alleging she had tested positive for methamphetamine at birth, and P.A. had
tested positive for marijuana and methadone, had no prenatal care and admitted
she smoked marijuana throughout her pregnancy and smoked methamphetamine just
before going into labor with Mariah.  The
petition further alleged P.A. had failed to reunify with Mariah's two half
siblings and she did not have custody of her other child and, Mariah's father,
Cesar T., had a history of substance abuse and knew P.A. was using drugs during
her pregnancy, but did not stop her. 
P.A. had a long history of substance abuse.  She said she knew she was not ready to be a
parent and was not even ready to start working on herself.  The court ordered Mariah detained and, at
P.A.'s request, ordered voluntary services for her.

            P.A. said
she had used methamphetamine almost every day during her pregnancy with Mariah
and did not stop using drugs because she did not want to have another baby, but
was afraid to have an abortion since she had already had about 11 to 12
abortions.  She currently lived in an
unsafe environment, surrounded by drug use and unsanitary conditions.  Two older children had been removed from her
custody.  N.A. was removed because P.A.
reported feeling stress with thoughts of hurting N.A. and because of her drug
and alcohol use and failure to arrange adequate care while she worked as a
prostitute.  P.A. declined to participate
in services in N.A.'s case, and N.A. was freed for adoption.  Her child, Romeo A., was removed when she and
Romeo's alleged father were arrested for getting into a car with Romeo while
they were under the influence of methamphetamine.  P.A. said she had used methamphetamine while
she was pregnant with Romeo.  She was not
offered reunification services because of her continued drug use and because
her services in N.A's case had been terminated.

            The social
worker said when he met with P.A. about Mariah's dependency, she was open and
honest about her past problems and was making efforts through voluntary
services to show she wanted to reunify with Mariah.  He expressed concern, however, that she had
used methamphetamine while pregnant, did not receive prenatal care, had not
moved out of a home where the people around her were using drugs and she had no
understanding of how to become an adequate parent.

            After
considering the evidence and argument presented at the jurisdictional and
dispositional hearing, the court found the allegations of the petition to be
true and that Mariah would be at a substantial risk of harm in parental
care.  It declared Mariah a dependent of
the juvenile court, removed her from parental custody, denied services to P.A.
under section 361.5, subdivision (b)(10) and (11), and did not find that it
would be in Mariah's best interests to offer P.A. services.  The court ordered services for Cesar.

DISCUSSION

            P.A.
contends the court reversibly erred by denying reunification services to
her.  She argues the court should have
exercised its discretion to order services under section 361.5, subdivision (c)
because offering her services was in Mariah's best interests.

            P.A. does
not contend the court erred by finding section 361.5, subdivision (b)(10)
and (11) applicable and denying her services on that basis.href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2" title="">[2]  Under section 361.5, subdivision (c), the trial court was therefore required to
deny reunification services unless it found by clear and convincing evidence
that reunification was in Mariah's best interests.

            A court has
broad discretion in deciding whether to offer reunification services under
section 361.5, subdivision
(c).  (In re William B. (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1220,
1227-1229.)  A determination
"committed to the sound discretion of the juvenile
court . . . should not be disturbed on appeal unless an
abuse of discretion is clearly established."  (In re Stephanie M. (1994) 7 Cal.4th
295, 318.)  " 'The appropriate test
for abuse of discretion is whether the trial court exceeded the bounds of
reason.' "  (Id. at
pp. 318-319.)

            P.A. has
not shown an abuse of the court's discretion. 
Although she was open and honest about her drug use and failures to
reunify with N.A. and Romeo, expressed an interest in reunifying with Mariah
and was making efforts to begin voluntary services, she had a very long history
of substance abuse, had not moved out of an environment where drug use was
prevalent and delayed in starting therapy that was offered on a voluntary
basis.  She had not participated in
reunification services for N.A. and Romeo, and, despite losing custody of these
children, never had any substance abuse treatment, but used methamphetamine
daily while she was pregnant with Mariah. 
She told the social worker she knew she could not be a safe parent for
Mariah and she needed to overcome many problems that stem from her terrible
childhood and long history of drug abuse and instability.  P.A.'s short period of voluntary services did
not show there was any likelihood that ordering services for her would result
in her becoming a safe and adequate parent. 
She has not shown the court abused its discretion by denying her
services or by finding that providing her with services was not in Mariah's
best interests.

DISPOSITION

            The order
is affirmed.

 

                                                           

McCONNELL,
P. J.

 

WE CONCUR:

 

 

                                                           

NARES, J.

 

 

                                                           

McDONALD, J.