In Re Baby Boy S.

Michael M. and Judith M. (the M’s) appeal judgments dismissing their Civil Code section 232, subdivision (a)(1) petition to have declared Baby Boy S. free from the parental custody and control of his mother Lora S. and his father Jeffrey M. The M’s contend the court abused its discretion in failing to find Lora and Jeffrey abandoned the baby, erred in fading to consider the best interests and welfare of the baby before reaching its decision on the abandonment issue, contend the parental preference of recent decisions is a return to outdated concepts of parental property rights in children, and argue courts must presume detriment to the child when taken from the secure environment of potential adoptive parents. We shall conclude the court correctly considered only the issue of abandonment as presented by the petition. The best interests of, and detriment to, the child are not cognizable by the court in deciding the child was not abandoned. As substantial evidence supports the judgments, we affirm.

I

Lora’s marriage to James S. produced a son. The marriage was eventually dissolved. San Bernardino Attorney Noll Richardson represented Lora. Lora met Jeffrey and became…