In THE INTEREST OF A. A., CHILDREN (MOTHER)

── In THE INTEREST OF A. A., CHILDREN (MOTHER) ── Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia Date: April 23, 2026 Category: General FIFTH DIVISION BROWN, C. J., RICKMAN, P. J., and MERCIER, J. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. https://www.gaappeals.us/rules April 23, 2026 In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A26A0173. IN THE INTEREST OF A. A., et al., CHILDREN (FATHER). A26A0174. IN THE INTEREST OF A. A., et al., CHILDREN (MOTHER). MERCIER, Judge. Following the juvenile court’s order discontinuing reunification services and recommending the future termination of their parental rights as part of a permanency plan, Thomas Altman and Kathleen Altman, the mother and father of two minor children, A. A. and B. A., appeal, contending that the evidence was not sufficient to show that A. A. had been subjected to chronic physical abuse under their care. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm. As a general matter, when a party appeals an order discontinuing reunification services, we construe the evidence in the light most favorable to the juvenile court’s judgment and factual findings. See In the Interest of C. P., 291 Ga. App. 699, 699– 700(1) (662 SE2d 802) (2008). Viewed in this light, the record shows that A. A. was born on September 28, 2024. A. A. and his older brother, B. A., lived in a home with their parents and their maternal grandmother. No evidence was presented that anyone other than these three adults cared for the children. In November 2024, A. A.’s parents sought treatment for him because he was suffering from injuries to his legs. Doctors examined A. A., and they discovered that the baby had twelve bone fractures across his body, all in various stages of healing. Specifically, A. A. had a fracture in his left arm, two in his right arm, two in his left leg, and seven in his right leg. In two of these instances, bones had become completely detached from each other.1 Dr. Emmanuel Pena, an expert in child abuse pediatrics, concluded that A. A.’s injuries resulted from simultaneous pulling and twisting that indicated the baby had been abused repeatedly. 1 A. A. required surgery, the implantation of pins, and casts to promote healing. Even with this medical intervention, some evidence indicated that A. A.’s injuries might limit his ability to walk normally and play sports in the future. 2  Following the discovery of A. A.’s extensive injuries, both parents and the grandmother were arrested and incarcerated.2 In addition, the Department of Family and Children Services (“DFCS”) filed complaints regarding A. A. and B. A., and, on November 20, 2024, the juvenile court ordered that both children be placed in DFCS’s custody and appointed a guardian ad litem. On November 27, 2024, DFCS filed a petition for dependency. Subsequently, on December 23, 2024, the juvenile court entered an Order of Adjudication and Temporary Disposition, finding that both children were dependent and abused,3 and in need of court protection.4 Thereafter, DFCS submitted a case plan that did not recommend or contain any reunification 2 At the time of the juvenile court’s ruling in this case, the mother and father were incarcerated with pending felony charges for two counts of aggravated battery, one count of cruelty to children in the first degree, and one count of cruelty to children in the second degree. The parents were also subject to bond conditions prohibiting any contact with A. A. and allowing only supervised contact with B. A. (if the parents were released from detention at some point in the future). The grandmother was also arrested, charged with the same crimes, and incarcerated. 3 OCGA § 15-11-2(22)(A)