In re Shawn S.

Filed 6/8/06 In re Shawn S. CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Robert G. Fowler, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed.

Nicole Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Amanda G. (Mother) appeals from an order of the dependency court terminating her parental rights as to six of her children: D.G., A.G., M.G., E.G., Shawn S.,^[1] and D.S.,^[2] ranging in age from 10 years old to one year old. We find no error and will affirm the judgment.

I

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On October 30, 2003, Mother's five oldest children were detained by the San Bernardino County Department of Children's Services (DCS) after DCS responded to a referral to the family home based on allegations of general neglect (D.S. had not yet been born). The referral alleged that Mother slept all day, locked her children out of her room and house, did not care for the children, and fought with her live-in boyfriend, K.S. The social worker responded to the home, discovered domestic violence issues between Mother and K.S., and noted the home to be filthy and in disarray. The biological father of the children, P.G., was in prison on drug charges. The paternal grandparents reported that Mother and K.S. were drug users who had no money and who fought and used drugs all day. A criminal background check of Mother, P.G., and K.S. revealed drug-related charges, incarcerations, and domestic violence between Mother and K.S. The social worker offered to assist Mother with emergency housing and provisions; however, Mother remained in her pajamas and repeatedly stated that she had no other options. At that point, the social worker deemed it necessary to remove the children from Mother's care.

On November 3, 2003, DCS filed Welfare and Institutions Code section 300^[3] petitions on behalf of the children. The petitions alleged that Mother and P.G. had substance abuse problems that affected their ability to care for the children, Mother was unable to protect the children from the domestic violence between herself and K.S., and P.G. was incarcerated and therefore unable to care for the children. The juvenile court temporarily detained the children in the paternal grandparents' home, scheduled a jurisdictional/dispositional hearing, and ordered Mother to submit to a drug test. The court authorized DCS to place the children back with Mother upon her obtaining suitable housing and a restraining order against K.S.

In a jurisdictional/dispositional report, the social worker noted on November 13, 2003, the children were removed from the paternal grandparents due to unsuitability of the grandparents. D.G., A.G., and M.G. were subsequently placed together in a foster home, and Shawn and E.G. were placed together in a separate home. The children reported that they did not want to visit K.S., as he had hit their mother in the past. The children's development appeared to be appropriate, and they appeared to be adjusting well, although the three oldest girls had bed wetting issues.

The report also noted that Mother had previous inconclusive referrals for general neglect and caretaker absence/incapacity. In addition, though Mother stated she had not used drugs since June 2002, DCS records disclosed that Mother had tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana in March 2003. Furthermore, Mother had failed to drug test on November 4, 2003, as ordered by the court. She had also failed to obtain a restraining order against K.S., and it appeared as though Mother intended to maintain her relationship with K.S.

The social worker recommended that Mother participate in a reunification plan that included attending a domestic violence prevention program, general counseling, parenting education, substance abuse counseling, and an outpatient substance abuse program and that she randomly drug test. The social worker also recommended that Mother be permitted supervised visits twice a week.

At the jurisdictional/dispositional hearing, the court made a finding that P.G. was the presumed father of all the children. P.G. submitted to the petitions on the basis of the social worker's reports. The court then found the section 300, subdivision (g) allegations pertaining to P.G. to be true. The court did not make a finding based upon the section 300, subdivision (b) allegation that P.G. suffered from a substance abuse problem. Mother contested the jurisdictional/dispositional hearing, and the matter was continued.

The contested jurisdictional/dispositional hearing was eventually held in April 2004. Mother waived her rights and submitted on the basis of the social worker's reports. She indicated that she had not begun any of her service components. The court sustained the petitions and found that the children came within section 300, subdivisions (b) and (g). The court declared the children dependents of the court and ordered reunification services for Mother.

On June 17, 2004, the social worker responded to a referral at St. Bernardine Hospital's neonatal intensive care unit. Mother had given birth to a premature baby boy, D.S., and had tested positive for methamphetamine at the time of the baby's birth. The social worker interviewed Mother at the hospital. Mother initially denied using drugs, but eventually admitted to occasionally using drugs while pregnant even though she knew it was harmful to the baby. The social worker eventually learned that D.S.'s father was possibly K.S.; Mother stated she did not inform the social worker he was the father because she did not want him to know.

On June 21, 2004, a section 300 petition was filed on behalf of D.S. The petition alleged that Mother was unable to protect the baby because his siblings were placed out of home due to substantiated allegations under section 300, subdivision (b), and Mother had failed to participate in services to address the issues that brought the siblings before the court. The petition also alleged that Mother had an unresolved substance abuse problem that affected her ability to care for the baby. The following day, D.S. was temporarily detained and removed from Mother's custody.

In a jurisdictional/dispositional report as to D.S., the social worker reported that DCS continued to offer Mother referrals to assist her in overcoming the issues that led to the baby's removal; however, Mother failed to participate in drug treatment, counseling, and drug testing. Mother admitted to a current substance abuse problem and indicated a desire to go to an inpatient drug treatment program. The social worker provided Mother with a referral for outpatient substance abuse treatment at Redlands Yucaipa Guidance Clinic (RYGC) and scheduled an appointment to meet with Mother the following day to provide additional referrals for inpatient substance abuse treatment. On June 30, 2004, the social worker met with Mother and provided her with a list of inpatient substance abuse programs. Mother was also provided with a form to drug test within 24 hours. The social worker later learned that Mother had failed to drug test. In addition, Mother had failed to keep an appointment with RYGC.

At the jurisdictional/ dispositional hearing, the court sustained the petition and declared D.S. to be a dependent of the court. The court also ordered reunification services for Mother and further ordered no sibling contact between D.S. and his siblings.

Mother failed to keep DCS informed of her whereabouts. The social worker attempted to contact Mother on May 25, 2004, to provide her with information pertaining to visits with her children. On July 15, 2004, the social worker learned that Mother was in jail for misdemeanor assault. When not incarcerated, Mother was residing with her stepfather and two maternal uncles in an unhealthy environment, where she had ready and easy access to drugs. Despite resources given to assist her with other housing options, Mother failed to follow through with any of the resources, which included resources for inpatient substance abuse treatment and counseling.

Meanwhile, Mother's older children were doing fairly well. D.G. was diagnosed with enuresis and displayed some behavioral problems in her placement that included physical altercations with her younger siblings and disobeying rules. D.G. expressed anger toward her mother, and though her aggressive behaviors subsided after some time in placement, they reappeared during the time Mother stopped visiting between May 2004 and August 2004. A.G. continued to struggle with issues of loss and abandonment. She was referred to a children's group therapy to address issues pertaining to social skills, impulse control, depression, grief, and anxiety. M.G. had displayed behavioral problems in placement, but they had subsided significantly since she had been attending therapy. E.G. was well bonded to her foster parents and did not show any signs of feelings of loss and separation from Mother. Shawn also did not appear to suffer from any negative feelings and appeared comfortable with his foster parents.

Once DCS located a home interested in adopting all five children, the social worker transitioned the children into the home from their respective foster placements. However, the foster parents later requested DCS remove the children because they did not believe their home was adequate for the children's needs. The foster parents reported that the older girls' behavior continued to be â€