In re M.W. CA4/1

INTRODUCTION

J.W. (Mother) appeals the juvenile court’s order denying her request at the 18-month review hearing to return her son, M.W., to her custody. (Welf.

& Inst. Code,1 § 366.22.) Mother contends insufficient evidence supports the court’s finding there would be a substantial risk of detriment to M.W.’s physical or emotional well-being if he returned to Mother’s care. Ma.W. (Father) joins Mother’s argument and states, “if this Court reverses the juvenile court’s findings and orders vis-à-vis [Mother’s] reunification services, then he requests that this Court remand the matter to the juvenile court with instructions for it to reinstate [Father’s] reunification services.” As we shall discuss, we conclude Father has not provided a sufficiently particularized argument in support of his contention that his reunification services should be reinstated, nor has he explained why Mother’s arguments apply equally to his claim. Thus, he has forfeited his claim on appeal. Moreover, we are unpersuaded by Mother’s challenge to the juvenile court’s finding of detriment, and we affirm.

All undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.

FACTUAL AND…