Jenny H. v. Sup. Ct.
Filed 4/17/06 Jenny H. v. Sup. Ct. CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| JENNY H., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TULARE COUNTY, Respondent, TULARE COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY, Real Party In Interest. |
F049651
(Super. Ct. No. JJV059519)
O P I N I O N |
THE COURT*
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for extraordinary writ review. Charlotte A. Wittig, Juvenile Court Referee.
Jenny H., in pro. per., for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Kathleen Bales-Lange, County Counsel, and Bryan Walters, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party In Interest.
-ooOoo-
Petitioner, in pro. per., seeks an extraordinary writ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 38) to vacate the orders of the juvenile court terminating reunification services and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing[1] as to her daughters A. and S. We will deny the petition.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
In December 2004, petitioner and newborn A. tested positive for methamphetamines. Additionally, A. exhibited symptoms associated with in utero exposure to drugs (vomiting and difficulty breathing).
Rather than seek the removal of A. and then one-year-old S., the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency (agency) offered petitioner voluntary family maintenance services, which included outpatient drug treatment, random drug testing and parenting education. Petitioner completed an individual plan for outpatient drug treatment in January 2005 but waited until May 2005 to participate in it. Meanwhile, she submitted a urine specimen showing signs of dilution in January 2005 and tested positive for amphetamines in February and March 2005. She also missed drug tests in March, April and May 2005.
In May 2005, the agency filed a dependency petition on the children's behalf, which the juvenile court sustained. At the dispositional hearing in June 2005, the court ordered petitioner to complete outpatient drug treatment and parenting classes and to submit to random drug testing. The court also ordered petitioner to complete residential drug treatment if she missed a drug test or tested positive. In the event petitioner required residential drug treatment, the court gave the caseworker the discretion to place the children with her there.
By July 2005, petitioner had violated the terms of outpatient drug treatment and was referred for residential treatment. In August 2005, she was offered admittance to the New Visions inpatient program but failed to contact the facility and forfeited her place. Petitioner continued in outpatient drug treatment until she was admitted to the â€
