T.J.
T.J. v. Superior Court CA4/2
Opinion
Opinion
FACTS
S.A. is three years old and was removed from his parents’ care shortly after birth.
San Bernardino County Children and Family Services (the department) completed a
Resource Family Approval (RFA) referral and placed S.A. with T.J. in August 2019. In
January 2020, T.J. received an RFA license. The next month, T.J. told the department
she was willing to be a concurrent placement. At the time, T.J. had been a foster parent
for over 15 years. T.J. lived with two adult daughters, an adoptive teenage son, and three
more children she had legal guardianship over. In addition, she had one biological adult
son, one biological adult daughter, and two adoptive adult sons who, as of January 2021,
did not live in the home.
The court terminated mother’s reunification services in June 2020. The court
continued S.A.’s placement with T.J. and noted this placement was a concurrent planning
home.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
2 As of October 2020, S.A. was attached to T.J. and comfortable in her home. In
January 2021, the department identified T.J. as S.A.’s prospective adoptive parent. S.A.
appeared “to be very comfortable in the…