In Re Matthew S.

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1313 OPINION A mother has delusions about the health of her minor son. Here we hold substantial evidence supports the conclusion that the minor is at risk of suffering serious emotional damage. Alexandra S. appeals from the jurisdictional and dispositional orders declaring her children, Matthew S. and Sarah S., to be dependents of the juvenile court. 1 Substantial evidence supports the jurisdictional order as to Matthew S. We affirm. FACTS Alexandra S. had these delusions: her son's penis had been mutilated, he was being treated at UCLA while she was on a trip to South America, she murdered the treating physician when she returned to find her son in a "septic state" at the hospital. Acting on these delusions, she took her 13-year-old son to a urologist, Doctor Michael deWit Clayton, for an examination on September 2, 1994. He found no evidence of injury whatsoever to her son's penis, and her son stated he had no such injury. Alexandra S. admitted that she needs help with her psychiatric problems, but that she had trouble finding such help at…

I dissent. As my colleagues have pointed out, there is no evidence that Matthew S. has suffered, nor is there a substantial risk that he will suffer, serious physical harm or illness as a result of Alexandra S.'s *Page 1322 supervision or protection of him. (Welf. Inst. Code, § 300 , subd. (b).) 1 Neither is there any showing of such harm from willful or negligent failure to provide food, clothing, shelter or medical treatment. (§ 300 , subd. (b).) The majority further acknowledges there is no evidence that Matthew S. is without any provision for support. Alexandra S. has supported her children in a well-kept three-bedroom home by obtaining various jobs over the ten years since her divorce, despite erratic payments of child and spousal support by her ex-husband. (§ 300 , subd. (g).) Her children are healthy, well groomed, and she has consistently obtained medical care for them over the years. There is no evidence of neglect or of lack of support for Matthew S. The majority concludes there is substantial evidence to support the finding of the juvenile court that Matthew S. is at risk of developing severe emotional problems in the future as the result of her inclusion of him in her…

A mother has delusions about the health of her minor son. Here we hold substantial evidence supports the conclusion that the minor is at risk of suffering serious emotional damage.

Alexandra S. appeals from the jurisdictional and dispositional orders declaring her children, Matthew S. and Sarah S., to be dependents of the juvenile court. [1]

Substantial evidence supports the jurisdictional order as to Matthew S. We affirm.

Alexandra S. had these delusions: her son's penis had been mutilated, he was being treated at UCLA while she was on a trip to South America, she murdered the treating physician when she returned to find her son in a "septic state" at the hospital. Acting on these delusions, she took her 13-year-old son to a urologist, Doctor Michael deWit Clayton, for an examination on September 2, 1994. He found no evidence of injury whatsoever to her son's penis, and her son stated he had no such injury. Alexandra S. admitted that she needs help with her psychiatric problems, but that she had trouble finding such help at the time. Although Doctor Clayton did not believe that Matthew S. was in danger of mistreatment, he contacted mental health services…