of as other indications of interest such as inquiries into the child's welfare state and ready to quit also must take into account various circumstances that may hinder a parent's ability to make regular visits i'm also s circumstances and mr riley didn't a concerted efforts to take a reasonable degree of interest in the child's life and the court did not consider those factors the state failed to provide any evidence showing how it placed the minor child environment stated points the fact that he failed a drug test shortly after completing drug testing however the standard is not perfect it is progress and we would argue that the poet should not be held to a standard that's impossible to meet as a sports w reason we argued the court here that he failed to make reasonable efforts to correct the conditions  environment injuries to his welfare and failure to make the reasonable efforts to care to correct the conditions the st issue the failure to maintain reasonable degree of interest his or her responsibility is objective only reasonable and a demonstration of some interest or correction does not equal fitness the defendant tries to claim that he could not make visitation because he was incarcerated in the department of corrections for fifteen months yes ok and then and that phone call i believe was also to the caseworker counsel brought that it he believes was useless because the child couldn't respond so he didn't write letters or phone calls because the child was only two years old but he could have written the letters to the case for her in order to establish show his concern or interest in the child the case for her could have responded then how the child was doing he did have gifts to the child but the caseworker pointed out that they were not appropriate gifts and that they were sugary foods and other things like that not what a child of that age would require however i believe the state believes that what he showed a reasonable degree of concern that is required under this  not established with one letter and one phone call for that fifteen months he was incarcerated and the incarceration was his own fault it was for the domestic battery that occurred after the case was open background not including the one from october two thousand and sixteen he was told he needed to work on the domestic violence and he did the assessment while he was paroled and it was with the carbon don't police department i believe and he attended one class but he was required to in two thousand four hundred and twenty four classes and he didn't and the rest of the class is because he's had his her group down there he could have switched to patients for the classes closer to where he lives regardless the trial court found that basically he didn't do what you needed to do you have twenty months to do it after you were released from to go see and you did not take the classes that you were supposed to with the nd issue the failure to protect child from conditions in the environment that are injurious certain actions of the substance abuse classes and everything was ok he used drugs again after that and that was very close to the the hearing and what he's going through your standard of review   the defendant had told her that the victim in the october domestic battery and battery would not have been hurt if she hadn't bashed him because his triggers are physical contact and people insulting his intelligence and that was and eighty one his general attitude towards the cases also was pointed out in that he stated he would do whatever necessary while the case was open but once the case was closed he was going to go back to being in self and  no progress one thing that counsel pointed out was that when the child was initially taken it was because the child tested positive for t h c because his mother used well he was pregnant the trial court pointed out that that the appellant lived with her at the time and could have prevented her from using the drugs while they were pregnant and the fact that marijuana is legal lies in any state at all doesn't equate that it's ok for the mother to subject the fetus to that it's the same thing as alcohol a pregnant woman is not supposed to drink alcohol where she's pregnant but alcohol is legal was on fit that he can establish that president that he suffered prejudice as a result of that and it's it's you have to prove both of them the st and the nd issue a lot of what he said  expert has to be do you can expert by the court and it's the caseworker and what the caseworker was asked was in her brown life experience being a caseworker with children in the foster care system  but it wasn't expert testimony so there was no expert testimony to object to that question to the foster mother about if the child would be upset if taken from her that was a proper question because the child is  but the foster mother had experience with the child and could gauge their reactions and what the child how the child would respond to certain things and she testified that the child was very close he called this off her sister cissy as a season deficient is either like to trials trial strategy whether wishes should be excluded is trial strategy there's no rule out there that says witnesses have to be excluded  i believe it is whether or not there is a possible benefit would be something that his trial counsel could answer but once again it is within the realm of trial strategy she can decide if she wants him excluded or you mean you can't have a horrible strategy that would follow an objective standard of reasonable but to say that not excluding witnesses is horrible strategy would be worthless it could be not the best strategy but it doesn't fall below that standard to where it's at that it made the proceedings a farce or a shame because it is a decision that attorney trial attorneys are faced with all the time whether or not you want  and we also don't think he suffered prejudice because of all the evidence that was presented and it wasn't just the state's evidence the there witnesses there were numerous reports that were entered into evidence and  trial counsel looked at that or the trial court looked at that and then the defendant testified for him self and his testimony did not help him he that he was he said he couldn't make it  to twenty four classes because it's twenty four classes and that ain't gonna happen overnight he couldn't make it as his car broke down but there were once it was months that he couldn't make it and his car was broken down and the  eighty three that the argument is he should have stopped the mother from smoking marijuana while she was pregnant we don't know when she had smoked marijuana to begin with should very well that it would wasn't there reilly just as well off prosek without an attorney and we would argue that is prejudicial that the lack of any strategy in your client witnesses were