evidence best interest goal must be proven by preponderance of the evidence in the case in part i'm sure the panel is aware of the facts there was a terminations of the mother's parental interests prior to the terminations the court heard evidence concerning the mother's progress or lack of progress in regard to achieving the goals of the service the state alleged three grounds of unfitness did not prove that the mother did not exhibit reasonable enters the court found the state did not prove that the mother did not make reasonable effort or did you find that the mother failed to make reasonable a blueprint that is used by both the state the courts in the department of children and family services what's known as a service plan should the panels were of that service plan contain certain goals  believes is essential towards the reunification of the family in this case the mother's goals were to find gainful of steady employment stable housing complete parenting classes and complete counsel and she embarked on her journey to try to accomplish those the state introduced one witness was a caseworker  at no time to the mother satisfy cups of goals or did she consider the case worker that the child's return was imminent now the interesting thing about goals in this case is that job so she was saying away from the job an effort to get income support maintain stable housing instead of that what she tried to do with you working and in between jobs she's trying to live on the cheap to get enough money to obtain a house she didn't take in housing for a period of sixty to ninety days and then it was t think the final analysis was that she had not totally pleaded parenting class there was some problem with the one referred and the one that she chose yourself did not present part of it as i recall basically with the supposed position is in the case of mark is that the shelter care order was not supported by sufficient evidence to even establish probable cause the permanen child but also according to the mother's position were orders and rulings that were against amenophis where the others the fish portion was caught sustained or supported by clear and convincing evidence and finally the best closing those i'm sure the courts mindful that i'm going to go and throw it out in the best interests hearing it was revealed to the court and testify by the caseworker that the adoptive placement for this child already had a sibling in the household sibling was a half sibling a carry member of a sister or brother but whether the use child's half sibling i believe was d as far as i know those two things are true i saw answered the shelter care argument and not my argument three that it's observed a decision is observed into the case especially in a case where mom admits the allegations that the adjudicatory hearing which was about a month later as of the merits i've set forth of the evidence in page two and three in my brief and basically it's two people testifying about the father's drug addiction prism another's problems and mother's prior indications with other children mother had a history of having children  arguments or as i can tell there's no legal contest terms no technical statutory contests it's all about the facts of the trial judge has already determined those facts the judge sanchez he was the that she failed in employment housing ties those economic factors now in their brief repeatedly they make this argument that because a trial judge did not find sufficient evidence for interest in efforts that somehow the since the state lost two out of three that this waters down the track courts finding of unfitness based on the lack of preschool progress but there's no authority for that and as far as i know this court has been saying for the twenty five years that i know of that one grounds enough one is enough and we've got one here as to the best interest as councils already pointed out just this miters baby at all times baby she's right now i think she's two years and two months and she's been placed with her half sister in an adoptive foster home is doing well  and i know at least two thirds of the court were trial judges and handle these types of hearings if the court would look at the evidence in toto from the state single with this case where there was a lot of i think so maybe probably might and it seems to me that those types of qualifying words fly in clearing missing evidence the other matter is well i would say this for years i suppose if someone were to compare my parenting and my children to somebody else's i would not be surprised if i lost the majority of times in the best interests contest so it's not really whether one is better than the others whether or not in fact this prevents the parent from destroying the parental duties such that terminations is in surrender of first child in that it would be considered as detrimental to any other children but i believe the record does support at least that theory and questions thank you very much if you