In re A.M.
J.M. (Father) and C.M. (Mother) appeal from the juvenile courts order terminating their parental rights to two-year-old A.M. pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] On appeal, Father claims (1) the Riverside County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) failed to maintain the sibling relationship pursuant to section 16002; (2) the court erred in failing to order sibling visitation when terminating parental rights; and (3) minors counsel had an actual conflict of interest and therefore should have been removed. Mother contends (1) the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying her section 388 petition; (2) DPSS failed to follow section 16002 and preserve and maintain the sibling relationship; and (3) the disentitlement doctrine applies to reverse the judgment terminating parental rights. Court reject these contentions and affirm the judgment.
Comments on In re A.M.