AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the termination of parental rights of Phelisha L. (Mother) to her four children, following allegations by the New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) of abuse and neglect. The allegations included that the children had suffered sexual abuse or exploitation by their father and had been physically or sexually abused when their mother knew or should have known of the abuse and failed to protect them. Mother pled no contest to the allegations, and the children were adjudicated as abused and neglected and placed in CYFD custody. A treatment plan was created for Mother, which she was unable to complete, leading to CYFD filing a motion for the termination of her parental rights (paras 2-5).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): Argued that the conditions and causes of the abuse and neglect were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future and that they made reasonable efforts to assist the parent in adjusting the conditions which rendered the parent unable to properly care for the child (paras 9, 12).
• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Contended that the district court’s judgment terminating her parental rights was erroneous due to a unilateral decision by a therapist to discontinue a treatment modality, insufficient evidence supporting the termination, and deprivation of her due process rights (paras 3, 13).

Legal Issues

• Whether the discontinuation of Mother's treatment by a therapist rendered her unable to complete her treatment plan and precluded reunification with her children (para 4).
• Whether the termination of Mother’s parental rights was supported by sufficient evidence (para 9).
• Whether the proceedings deprived Mother of her due process rights (para 14).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment terminating Mother's parental rights to her four children (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, with Judge J. Miles Hanisee writing the opinion, and Judges Zachary A. Ives and Jane B. Yohalem concurring, found no error in the district court's judgment. The court determined that the therapist's decision to discontinue Mother's treatment was based on her general unwillingness to acknowledge the full scope of abuse endured by the children, not solely on her refusal to admit to a specific incident of attempted drowning. The court also found that there was substantial evidence supporting the district court's judgment that the conditions and causes of the abuse and neglect were unlikely to change in the foreseeable future and that CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist Mother. Finally, the court concluded that there was no violation of Mother's due process rights, as she did not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that the outcome might have been different with additional procedural safeguards (paras 4-16).