[CHILD] loves [HIS/HER] mom and is bonded to [HIM/HER]. However, [CHILD]’s relationship with [HIS/HER] mother is not an appropriate parent-child relationship. [MOTHER] is unable to provide consequences for misbehavior and she gets upset if [CHILD] is [CHILD]’s mad at [HIM/HER] and apologizes to [CHILD]. The Court finds that [CHILD] loves [PETITIONER] and is comfortable with [HIM/HER]. therapist testified that [CHILD] calls [PETITIONER] [CHILD]’s “[NICKNAME]” and relates to [HIM/HER] and [HIS/HER] [SON/DAUGHTER] as family members. [MOTHER] testified that [CHILD] has had a with [PETITIONER]. “always relationship” [CHILD] also has a relationship with mother, whom she calls [PETITIONER]’s and they see each other weekly. “[NICKNAME],” To the extent feasible, the opinion of his own best interest in the matter. child’s (D.C. Code § 16-2383 (d)(4).) The court credits testimony that [CHILD] would like to live with [MOTHER]. However, the court also credits testimony that if [HE/SHE] is unable to live with [HIS/HER] mother, [CHILD] would like to live with [PETITIONER]. In finding reunification is not appropriate at this time, the court has considered recommendation that reunification is [CHILD]’s therapist’s not in best interests, age, [HIS/HER] emotional maturity and cognitive [CHILD]’s [CHILD]’s level, and [HIS/HER] obvious academic, social, and emotional progress in [PETITIONER]’s care. Evidence that drug-related activity continues to exist in a home environment child’s after intervention and services have been provided. (D.C. Code § 16-2383 (d)(5).)
[CHILD] loves [HIS/HER] mom and is bonded to [HIM/HER]. However, [CHILD]’s relationship with [HIS/HER] mother is not an appropriate parent-child relationship. [MOTHER] is unable to provide consequences for [CHILD]’s misbehavior and she gets upset if [CHILD] is mad at [HIM/HER] and apologizes to [CHILD]. The Court finds that [CHILD] loves [PETITIONER] and is comfortable with [HIM/HER]. [CHILD]’s therapist testified that [CHILD] calls [PETITIONER] “[NICKNAME]” and relates to [HIM/HER] and [HIS/HER] [SON/DAUGHTER] as family members. [MOTHER] testified that [CHILD] has “always had a relationship” with [PETITIONER]. [CHILD] also has a relationship with [PETITIONER]’s mother, whom she calls “[NICKNAME],” and they see each other weekly. To the extent feasible, the child’s opinion of his own best interest in the matter. (D.C. Code § 16-2383 (d)(4).) The court credits testimony that [CHILD] would like to live with [MOTHER]. However, the court also credits testimony that if [HE/SHE] is unable to live with [HIS/HER] mother, [CHILD] would like to live with [PETITIONER]. In finding reunification is not appropriate at this time, the court has considered [CHILD]’s therapist’s recommendation that reunification is not in [CHILD]’s best interests, [CHILD]’s age, [HIS/HER] emotional maturity and cognitive level, and [HIS/HER] obvious academic, social, and emotional progress in [PETITIONER]’s care. Evidence that drug-related activity continues to exist in a child’s home environment after intervention and services have been provided. (D.C. Code § 16-2383 (d)(5).)
GDN%20MODEL%2C%20Guardianship%20FOF%20COL.docx