In Re Term of Parental Rights as to W.M.

── In Re Term of Parental Rights as to W.M. ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arizona Date: April 08, 2026 Category: General NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE IN RE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO W.M. No. 1 CA-JV 25-0167 FILED 04-08-2026 Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County No. JD532965 The Honorable Peter A. Thompson, Judge AFFIRMED COUNSEL Maricopa County Legal Defender’s Office, Phoenix By Jamie R. Heller Counsel for Appellant David W. Bell, Attorney at Law, Mesa By David W. Bell Counsel for Child Arizona Attorney General’s Office, Phoenix By Ingeet Pandya Counsel for Appellee Arizona Department of Child Safety  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO W.M. Decision of the Court MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in which Judge Veronika Fabian and Vice Chief Judge David D. Weinzweig joined. B R O W N, Judge: ¶1 Ashley C. (“Mother”) appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights on the grounds of abandonment and six months’ time-in-care. Because she has not shown the court clearly erred, we affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 In April 2024, Mother gave birth to W.M.; he was born substance exposed to marijuana. Soon after his birth, the Department of Child Safety (“DCS”) petitioned for dependency as to Mother based on substance abuse and mental health concerns. She did not contest the allegations and the court found W.M. dependent. ¶3 DCS provided Mother with various services, including drug testing, substance abuse treatment, parenting classes, and supervised visitation. Throughout 2024, Mother’s participation in services was sporadic; many of her referrals were closed out for lack of engagement and she missed several supervised visits. Mother’s last visit that year with W.M. occurred on December 12. After the visit ended early because of W.M. crying inconsolably, a DCS case aide found what appeared to be drug paraphernalia in the diaper bag Mother brought to the visit. Mother did not have another visit or otherwise see W.M. until June of the following year. ¶4 In March 2025, DCS moved to terminate Mother’s parental rights to W.M. on the grounds of abandonment and six months’ time-in- care under A.R.S. § 8-533(B)(1), (8)(b). DCS alleged in part that Mother failed to maintain a normal relationship with W.M. by failing to maintain regular contact, offer reasonable support, or provide normal supervision. Mother did not appear at a pretrial conference in June. After noting Mother was properly served and admonished about the consequences for not appearing, the court proceeded with a termination hearing. Finding 2  IN RE TERM OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AS TO W.M. Decision of the Court Mother’s failure to appear constituted an admission of the allegations in the motion, the juvenile court concluded that DCS proved both grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence and that termination of her parental rights was in W.M.’s best interests. ¶5 Mother moved to set aside the termination order, explaining she was hospitalized at the time of the hearing. The court granted Mother’s motion, setting another date for a termination hearing. Mother’s engagement in services improved. She regularly attended visits with W.M. as of June 26, and she participated in parenting classes. Yet she refused to complete drug tests and her referrals for substance abuse treatment closed for lack o