State of Utah, in the interest of C.S., J.M., B.M., and N.M.

State of Utah, in the interest of C.S., J.M., B.M., and N.M., persons under eighteen years of age IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

State of Utah, in the interest of C.S., J.M., B.M., and N.M., persons under eighteen years of age.
______________________________

State of Utah,
Appellee,

v.

P.S.,
Appellant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)

Case No. 990958-CA

F I L E D
August 24, 2000
  2000 UT App 250 -----

Third District Juvenile, Salt Lake Department
The Honorable Frederic M. Oddone

Attorneys:
John E. Laherty, Salt Lake City, for Appellant
Jan Graham and John Peterson, Salt Lake City, for Appellee
Martha Pierce, Salt Lake City, Guardian Ad Litem

-----

Before Judges Jackson, Orme, and Thorne.

PER CURIAM:

P.S. contends that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support findings of fact 42 and 53 and that the findings of fact are insufficient to support a conclusion that it was in the best interests of J.M. and B.M. for P.S.'s parental rights to be terminated. P.S. focuses on the second prong of a termination decision (best interests of the children), rather than on the first prong (grounds for termination). See Utah Code Ann. § 78-3a-402(2) (1996) (stating if court determines parent is unfit or incompetent, it must consider welfare and best interest of child in determining whether a parent's rights should be terminated).

Both of P.S.'s arguments on appeal can be rejected. First, there was sufficient evidence to support findings of fact 42 and 53. Finding forty-two states that:

[P.S.] has been to [J.M. and B.M.'s foster] home and while [J.M.] knows that [P.S.] is her mother and is content to see her, she now refers to her as Patricia. [B.M.] does not identify [P.S.] as a parent figure[,] does not call her "mom" or actively involve herself with [P.S.] when she comes for visits.

In contesting this finding, P.S. ignores much of the evidence about the girls' relationship with and reaction to their mother. Also, other findings, to which P.S. does not object, further discuss and clarify P.S.'s relationship with her children. In finding number 43, for example, the trial court found that the foster mother has a friendly relationship with P.S. and invites her over, and that J.M. recognizes P.S. and is happy to see her. Other findings, which are supported by the evidence, indicate that the children understand that P.S. is their biological mother, but look to their foster mother for nurturing and day-to-day care.

The first half of finding 53, to which P.S. objects, says: "The court finds that based on the facts presented, while [C.S., J.M., and B.M.], know and like [P.S.] the children wish to remain in their current placements." There was testimony from a number of witnesses to support the conclusion that the girls are happy and thriving with their foster family. The later part of finding 53, to which P.S. does not object, says "[f]urther in light of [P.S.'s] inability to resolve her drug addiction and complete parenting classes and therapy it is in the best interests of these children that they be stabilized in the homes they are in." Even if findings 42 and 53 were omitted, there are several other findings supported by the evidence, and to which P.S. does not object, that demonstrate it was in the children's best interests to have P.S.'s parental rights terminated.

Second, the trial court's findings were sufficient to support the conclusion that it was in the best interests of J.M. and B.M. for P.S.'s parental rights to be terminated. The evidence showed that P.S. had a long-standing drug problem and although she loves her children, she could not complete drug rehabilitation; her drug problem negatively impacted her ability to care for her children; she did not complete treatment plans; she missed many scheduled visits with her children; she continued to test positive for drug use; and the children were improving and seemed happy in their foster care placement. As we have said before, if grounds for termination have been found "it is usually in the best interests of the child to terminate that relationship and allow the child an opportunity to establish a meaningful relationship with loving, responsible parents." In re P.H., 783 P.2d 565, 569 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). The facts and evidence in this case support such a conclusion.

The juvenile court's order terminating P.S.'s parental rights is affirmed.
 
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Norman H. Jackson,
Associate Presiding Judge
 
 
 
 
 

______________________________
Gregory K. Orme, Judge
 
 
 
 
 

______________________________
William A. Thorne, Judge