In re T.C. CA4/2
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
B.C. (father) appeals from a juvenile court’s order at the 12-month review hearing
(Welf. & Inst. Code,1 § 366.21, subd. (f)) terminating his reunification services and
setting a hearing under section 366.26 to consider the implementation of a permanent
plan regarding his son, T.C. (the child). Father contends that the court erred when it
terminated his services since there was a substantial probability that the child could be
returned to his care if the case was continued for an additional six months. We affirm.
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On October 29, 2020, the San Bernardino County Children and Family Services
(CFS) filed a section 300 petition on behalf of the child, alleging that he came within the
provisions of subdivisions (b) (failure to protect), (g) (no provision for support), and (j)
(abuse of sibling). The child was 14 years old at the time. The petition specifically
alleged that the child suffered from behavioral and emotional problems, which father was
unable to manage, thereby leaving the child at risk of abuse and neglect. The other
allegations concerned the child’s mother, S.W. (mother), who is not a party to this appeal.