In Re James F.

In a dependency case (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300 et seq.), the juvenile court may terminate a parent's interest in a child's companionship, care, and custody after the child has been removed from the parents' home, efforts to reunify the family have failed, and adoption has been identified as the permanent placement goal. ( Id., § 366.26, subd. (b)(1); see In re Celine R. (2003) 31 Cal.4th 45, 52-53 , 1 Cal. Rptr.3d 432 , 71 P.3d 787 .) Because a basic civil right of the parent is thus at stake ( In re Marilyn H. (1993) 5 Cal.4th 295, 306 , 19 Cal.Rptr.2d 544 , 851 P.2d 826 ), significant due process safeguards have been built into the dependency scheme ( id. at p. 307, 19 Cal.Rptr.2d 544 , 851 P.2d 826 ), including a right to court-appointed counsel for a parent who cannot afford to retain counsel (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 317).

In a dependency case, a parent who is mentally incompetent must appear through a guardian ad litem, to whom the parent yields management and control of the litigation. ( In re Daniel S. (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 903, 912 , 9 Cal.Rptr.3d 646 ; In re Sara D. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 661, 665-667 , 104 Cal.Rptr.2d 909 .) Before appointing a guardian ad…