Opinion
B297942
02-11-2020
In re JIMENA L.M., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VERONICA M., Defendant and Appellant.
Karen B. Stalter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Veronica M. Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Kristine P. Miles, Assistant County Counsel, and Timothy M. O'Crowley, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19CCJP01142A) APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Craig S. Barnes, Judge. Affirmed. Karen B. Stalter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Veronica M. Mary C. Wickham, County Counsel, Kristine P. Miles, Assistant County Counsel, and Timothy M. O'Crowley, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
Appellant Veronica M. (Mother) was hospitalized after locking herself in a bathroom, cutting her wrist, and attempting to drink household cleaners. Upon finding Mother suffers from untreated mental and emotional problems, the juvenile court asserted jurisdiction over her daughter, Jimena L.M., and removed the child from Mother's custody. On appeal, Mother contends the court's findings and orders are not supported by substantial evidence. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Referral and Investigation
Three-year-old Jimena came to the attention of the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) on February 5, 2019, when DCFS received a report that Mother had been involuntarily hospitalized after drinking a pint of vodka, cutting her wrist, and attempting to drink Drano, which is a drain cleaning product.
According to a hospital social worker, Mother disclosed she drank Drano and Comet cleaner and took Prilosec pills, which treat heartburn. A medical examination suggested Mother had put the Drano in her mouth, but had not swallowed it. Mother also had superficial lacerations to her right wrist, which appeared to be self-inflicted. Mother's blood-alcohol content was 1.84, and cocaine was found in her system. Mother told the social worker she wanted to commit suicide.
Maternal uncle reported to DCFS that the incident occurred at his apartment while Mother and Jimena were visiting. Mother locked herself in the bathroom and refused to open the door. Maternal uncle broke down the door and found Mother bleeding and surrounded by bottles of vodka, heartburn medication, Drano, and Nyquil. Mother was putting drops of Comet cleaner in her mouth. According to maternal aunt, Mother said "I'm going to die today, take care of my daughter." Maternal uncle took Mother to the fire station, and Mother claimed she "was just playing."
According to maternal uncle, Mother had previously been hospitalized for anxiety. Mother told him she had been prescribed medication, but he could not remember the name.
When a DCFS social worker asked Mother if she was aware of the allegations in the referral, Mother responded, "No, well nothing bad happened." Mother said the day of the incident she drank vodka and tried cocaine for the first time. She was listening to a romantic song and became sad thinking about how Jimena's father (Father) had abused her in the past. Mother then cut her wrist with a razor, but denied trying to kill herself, explaining she was "just sad." Mother admitted putting Drano in her mouth, but she could not explain why she did so. She said she also took Nyquil and was going to "taste the comet," but she was interrupted by maternal uncle breaking down the bathroom door.
Mother denied any suicidal ideation. She said she does not consider herself "mental or depressed," has never had problems with her mental state of mind, and has never been prescribed medication for mental health issues.
Mother told DCFS that Father lives in Texas. While they were together, Father would physically abuse her, but the violence never occurred in Jimena's presence.
Father reported to DCFS that Mother had previously been hospitalized four times to treat anxiety. Mother was prescribed medication, but Father could not recall the name and did not know if she was still taking it. Father denied physically abusing Mother.
Dependency Proceedings
On February 21, 2019, DCFS filed a petition asserting Jimena is a person described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 300. The petition alleged three counts under section 300, subdivision (b)(1): (1) Mother has mental and emotional problems that caused her to attempt suicide while Jimena was under her care and supervision (count b1); (2) Mother abuses alcohol and cocaine (count b2); and (3) Mother and Father have a history of domestic violence (count b3). The petition also alleged a single count under section 300, subdivision (a), related to Mother and Father's history of domestic violence (count a1).
All future undesignated statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code.
Count b1 alleged, in full: "The child Jimena [L.M.]'s mother, Veronica [M.] has mental and emotional problems including a diagnosis of depression and suicidal ideation. On or about 02/05/2019, the mother inflicted a laceration to the mother's wrist and attempted to drink Draino [sic] to commit suicide while the child was in the mother's care and supervision. On 02/05/2019, the mother was hospitalized for the evaluation and treatment of the mother's psychiatric condition. Such mental and emotional problems on the part of the mother endanger the child's physical health and safety and place the child at risk of serious physical harm, damage and danger."
DCFS did not detain Jimena, despite the concerns raised in the petition. At the detention hearing, however, Jimena's counsel recommended the child be removed from Mother's custody given the evidence showing Mother has serious unresolved mental health and substance abuse issues. The court agreed, removed Jimena from Mother's custody, and ordered she be placed with maternal uncle.
The court held a combined jurisdiction/disposition hearing on March 15, 2019. DCFS submitted evidence establishing the facts summarized above. Mother submitted evidence showing she enrolled in psychotherapy in late February 2019 and had attended two individual therapy sessions. She had also enrolled in a parenting/child abuse program.
The court sustained count b1, which concerned Mother's mental and emotional problems. It dismissed the remaining counts, which concerned Mother's substance abuse and the parents' history of domestic violence. The court declared Jimena a dependent of the court, removed her from Mother's custody, and ordered reunification services.
Mother timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
I. Substantial Evidence Supports the Jurisdictional Findings
Mother contends the juvenile court's jurisdictional findings are not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree.
" 'In reviewing the jurisdictional findings . . . , we look to see if substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, supports them. [Citation.] In making this determination, we draw all reasonable inferences from the evidence to support the findings . . . of the dependency court; we review the record in the light most favorable to the court's determinations; and we note that issues of fact and credibility are the province of the trial court.' " (In re R.T. (2017) 3 Cal.5th 622, 633.)
Under section 300, subdivision (b)(1), the juvenile court may exercise jurisdiction over a child when the child "has suffered, or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer, serious physical harm or illness" as a result of the failure of his or her parent to "adequately supervise or protect the child" or by the failure of the parent to "provide regular care for the child due to the parent's mental illness, developmental disability, or substance abuse." A single incident of potentially harmful conduct may be sufficient to establish jurisdiction. (In re J.N. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1010, 1025-1026.) "In evaluating risk based upon a single episode of endangering conduct, a juvenile court should consider the nature of the conduct and all surrounding circumstances. It should also consider the present circumstances, which might include, among other things, evidence of the parent's current understanding of and attitude toward the past conduct that endangered a child, or participation in educational programs, or other steps taken, by the parent to address the problematic conduct in the interim . . . ." (Ibid.)
Here, there is substantial evidence supporting the jurisdictional findings. It is undisputed that, while Jimena was under Mother's care and supervision, Mother consumed a large quantity of alcohol, locked herself in a bathroom, cut her wrist, and attempted to drink hazardous household cleaning products. Despite Mother's protestations to the contrary, the evidence indicates she did so with the intent of committing suicide. Mother reportedly told a hospital social worker she intended to kill herself. Further, according to maternal aunt, Mother remarked that she was "going to die today."
The evidence further demonstrates the incident was the result of Mother's untreated mental health issues. Father and maternal uncle reported Mother has a history of severe mental illness, which required at least four prior hospitalizations. Mother, however, denied taking medication or receiving treatment for mental health issues at the time of the incident. Given Mother's history and the extreme nature of her behavior, the juvenile court could have reasonably inferred her mental health issues were an underlying cause of the incident.
There is also evidence demonstrating Mother is likely to engage in similar conduct in the future. Mother displayed minimal insight into the underlying causes of the incident or the risk of harm posed to Jimena. When questioned about the incident, Mother insisted "nothing bad happened" and explained she simply felt sad after listening to a romantic song and reflecting on her relationship with Father. Mother also denied suffering from a mental illness and having attempted to commit suicide, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Although Mother subsequently enrolled in psychotherapy, as of the jurisdiction hearing she had attended only two sessions, and there is nothing indicating the treatment adequately addressed her mental health issues. On this record, the juvenile court could have reasonably concluded Mother's mental health issues will persist and are likely to cause her to engage in similar conduct in the future. (See In re Gabriel K. (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 188, 197 ["One cannot correct a problem one fails to acknowledge."]; In re T.V. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 126, 133 ["A parent's past conduct is a good predictor of future behavior."].) Given Jimena's tender age and the fact that Mother is her sole caregiver, if Mother were to commit suicide or otherwise harm herself in a similar fashion, the risk to Jimena's physical safety would be immense. (See In re Kristin H. (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1635, 1653 [finding a mother's suicide attempt posed a risk of harm to her young child]; In re Travis C. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 1219, 1226 [noting the risk to a child from the mother's threat of suicide].)
Mother suggests her prior conduct posed no risk to Jimena because the maternal uncle and aunt were present and able to care for the child while Mother was incapacitated. The basis for jurisdiction, however, is not that Mother previously placed Jimena at risk of harm; rather, it is the risk she will do so in the future. Given Mother's conduct was impulsive and fueled by untreated mental health issues, the juvenile court could have reasonably concluded there is a considerable likelihood such conduct will recur while Mother is alone with Jimena, thereby placing the child at significant risk of harm.
Mother's reliance on In re James R. (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 129 (James R.), is misplaced. In that case, the juvenile court asserted jurisdiction over several young children in part because of concerns about their mother's mental health issues. The mother reportedly had a history of suicide attempts and had recently been hospitalized after suffering a negative reaction from consuming alcohol and taking prescription ibuprofen. (Id. at pp. 131-132.) The mother, however, denied she was attempting to harm herself. (Id. at p. 132.)
The Court of Appeal reversed, finding any link between the mother's mental state and future harm to the children was speculative. (James R., supra, 176 Cal.App.4th at p. 136.) The court noted there was no evidence the mother had suicidal ideation since the birth of her children, nor had there been a determination that she was a danger to herself or others. (Ibid.) The court also noted the father was able to protect and supervise the minors, and there was nothing indicating he might leave them alone with the mother while she attempted to harm herself. (Id. at p. 137.)
Here, in contrast, there is substantial evidence showing Mother recently attempted to commit suicide and is clearly a danger to herself. Moreover, because Father lives in Texas, he would not be able to protect and supervise Jimena in the event Mother again attempts to commit suicide or otherwise harm herself in a similar fashion. These facts distinguish the present case from James R. and, considered with the evidence recounted above, establish more than a speculative risk of harm posed by Mother's mental health issues.
Mother's reliance on In re Joaquin C. (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 537 (Joaquin C.), and In re David M. (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 822 (David M.), is similarly misplaced. In those cases, the evidence established the parents suffered from mental illnesses, but there was no evidence linking those illnesses to specific risks of harm to the children. (See Joaquin C., supra, at pp. 563-564; David M., supra, at pp. 830-831.) Here, in contrast, the evidence shows Mother's untreated mental health issues led her to attempt suicide while Jimena was under her care and supervision. There is also evidence that, until Mother addresses her mental health issues, such conduct is likely to recur, which poses a serious risk to Jimena's physical safety. Thus, unlike in Joaquin C. and David M., there is evidence of a direct link between Mother's mental health issues and a specific risk to Jimena. That link warrants jurisdiction in this case.
II. Mother's Challenge to the Removal Order is Moot
While this appeal was pending, the juvenile court returned Jimena to Mother's custody. DCFS argues, and Mother concedes, her challenge to the removal order is now moot. We agree. (See In re N.S. (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 53, 58-60.) Therefore, we do not consider the merits of Mother's challenge to the removal order.
We grant DCFS's motion for judicial notice of the juvenile court's September 13, 2019 orders. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)
DISPOSITION
The findings and orders are affirmed.
BIGELOW, P.J. WE CONCUR:
GRIMES, J.
STRATTON, J.