A.C. v. Super, Ct.
A.C., a two-year-old child, and her mother R.F. have filed writ petitions seeking review of a juvenile court order terminating reunification services and setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] ( 366.26, subd. (l); Cal. Rules of Court, rules 8.450-8.452.)[2] Both mother and child seek either return of the child to mothers custody or, in the alternative, the continuation of services, contending that there is insufficient evidence to support the finding that reasonable services were provided or offered. They also contend that the Department of Family and Childrens Services (the Department) failed to establish that return of A.C. to her mother would create a substantial risk of detriment to her safety, protection, or physical or emotional wellbeing. They further contend that the juvenile court abused its discretion in reducing mothers visits with the child. Lastly, mother separately contends that the Department failed to comply with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.). Although Court deny the writ petitions for the reasons stated below, we observe that mother may file a section 388 petition setting forth any change of circumstances or new evidence that may support her request for additional reunification services, including but not limited to a request for a second psychological evaluation, prior to the section 366.26 hearing which is currently set for December 22, 2008.
Comments on A.C. v. Super, Ct.