## Facts

- CYFD took custody of Elizabeth H. in March 1998, when she was about four and a half years old, after prior referrals for inadequate supervision and at Mother’s request because she said she could not care for the child.
- When removed, the child was described as dirty, unkempt, and hungry.
- Mother entered a no-contest plea to neglect; the court entered a stipulated neglect judgment on May 27, 1998.
- At removal, Mother had serious health issues, including a thyroid disorder and, soon after, breast cancer; she underwent a mastectomy and radiation therapy in 1998.
- CYFD developed and implemented a treatment plan informed by psychological evaluation and aimed at Mother’s emotional functioning, parenting skills, and ability to manage the child’s significant behavioral needs.
- CYFD provided services over roughly two and a half years, including counseling/therapy, parenting education, and supervised visitation with ongoing observation of parent-child interactions.
- Visits were frequently difficult, and the child’s behavior required a high level of parenting skill; evidence raised concerns about Mother’s ability to provide stable, safe care within a reasonable time.
- After permanency hearings and extended out-of-home placement, the district court terminated Mother’s parental rights under NMSA 1978, § 32A-4-28(B)(2), finding reasonable efforts by CYFD and that further efforts would be futile.

## Issues

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported the finding that CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist Mother in remedying the causes and conditions of neglect as required by NMSA 1978, § 32A-4-28(B)(2).
2. Whether clear and convincing evidence supported the finding that further reunification efforts would be futile, justifying termination under § 32A-4-28(B)(2).

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of New Mexico affirmed the termination of Mother’s parental rights.
- The court held that substantial evidence supported, by the clear and convincing standard, the findings that CYFD made reasonable efforts and that further efforts would be futile.
- The court rejected arguments that the evidence required a different result, emphasizing that appellate review does not reweigh the evidence.

## Legal Principles

- Termination under NMSA 1978, § 32A-4-28(B)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that the child was neglected, the agency made reasonable efforts to assist the parent in correcting the conditions and causes of neglect, and further efforts would be futile.
- “Reasonable efforts” are assessed in light of the parent’s circumstances, the child’s needs, and the time elapsed; the agency is not required to provide every conceivable service or to continue efforts indefinitely.
- A futility finding may be supported when extensive services over a substantial period do not produce sufficient, sustained progress to permit safe reunification within a time frame consistent with the child’s need for permanency.
- On appeal, the reviewing court asks whether the fact-finder could have formed an abiding conviction that the statutory grounds were proven by clear and convincing evidence, without substituting its judgment on disputed facts.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals upheld termination because CYFD provided services reasonably directed at the causes of neglect over an extended period, and the evidence supported the district court’s determination that Mother could not safely reunify within a time frame consistent with the child’s need for stability and that additional reunification efforts would be futile.


State ex rel. Child., Youth & Fams. Dep’t v. Patricia H. (In re Elizabeth H.), 132 N.M. 299, 47 P.3d 859 (Ct. App. 2002)