Princess M. v. Superior Court
Filed 7/31/06 Princess M. v. Superior Court CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| PRINCESS M., Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Real Party in Interest. | B190406 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. CK57071) |
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING; petition for extraordinary writ. Jacqueline Lewis, Juvenile Court Referee. Petition denied.
Helen Yee for Petitioner.
No appearance for Respondent.
Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Liana Serobian, Senior Associate County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.
Children's Law Center of Los Angeles and Kirk McDonald for minor, Damon O., Jr.
INTRODUCTION
Princess M. petitions this court (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 38.1) for writ relief from the dependency court's order terminating family reunification services and setting a permanent plan hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26[1]) with respect to her son Damon O., Jr. Petitioner contends that the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) failed to provide her with reasonable family reunification services and that the dependency court erroneously terminated those services. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the dependency court's order and deny the petition.
FACTS
On October 25, 2004, DCFS took then 18-month-old Damon into protective custody after his 3-month-old sister, Diamond O., was found dead in the home of a relative where petitioner had been staying. Diamond was foaming at the mouth and lying on a white, powdery substance. The residence was filthy and had a strong pungent odor. The residence was laden with trash, dead cockroaches, and a white powdery substance alleged to be a mixture of boric acid and sugar used to kill cockroaches. The coroner was unable to determine the cause of Diamond's death.
Damon suffers from a very serious inherited metabolic condition, Phenylketonuria (PKU). PKU necessitates regular medical oversight and compliance with a severely restrictive low-phenylalanine diet. The failure to observe these dietary restrictions results in high levels of phenylalanine. Over time, elevated levels of phenylalanine could result in brain damage and other disorders.
Petitioner and Damon's presumed father, Damon O., Sr.,[2] learned of Damon's condition at birth and were well aware of his special dietary needs. When DCFS took Damon into protective custody, his PKU levels were high, suggesting that his parents had neglected his special needs. DCFS placed Damon with Ericka R., whose sister, Kelly R., was engaged to Damon's paternal grandfather. Within one month of placement, Ericka and Kelly had been trained by the medical genetics team at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, and Damon's PKU level went from being high to being within normal ranges.
On January 18, 2005, the court declared Damon a dependent of the court under section 300, subdivision (b). The court ordered family reunification services for the parents and monitored visitation for petitioner. The court ordered petitioner and Damon O., Sr., to complete a training program for children diagnosed with PKU sponsored by Children's Hospital and to attend a parenting class. The court also ordered petitioner to undergo individual counseling. Both parents signed the case plan, signifying their agreement to complete the programs ordered by the court.
By the time of the six-month review hearing (§ 366.21, subd. (e)) held on May 27, 2005 as to petitioner, Damon was doing well and bonded to Ericka. Ericka no longer felt comfortable monitoring visits between petitioner and Damon, however, in that petitioner brought family members who attempted to intimidate Ericka. Petitioner also had been inappropriate with Ericka, resulting in a request by Ericka to have Damon replaced.
The court found petitioner's compliance with the case plan to be partial but noted that she had consistently and regularly visited Damon and made significant progress in resolving the issues warranting Damon's removal. Concluding that there was a substantial likelihood that Damon could be returned to petitioner within the next period of review, the court extended petitioner's family reunification services.
In June 2005, petitioner gave birth to a healthy child. Petitioner was living in Rialto with her paternal grandmother. Due to the birth of her baby, petitioner recently had been unable to comply with the case plan. Petitioner continued to have contact with Damon's father.
In August 2005, DCFS reported that it was difficult to service mother's case out of county, in that petitioner and her new baby were living in San Bernardino County with the paternal grandmother. Petitioner had been unable to attend Damon's medical appointments at Children's Hospital or to visit Damon due to a lack of transportation. The visit site had been changed so that visits could take place. Although petitioner had completed a parenting class, she continued â€
