Filed 12/19/13 In re B.D. CA2/2 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS 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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 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. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT 

DIVISION TWO 

In re B.D., et al., Persons Coming Under 

the Juvenile Court Law. 

 B244760 

 (Los Angeles County 

 Super. Ct. No. CK95274) 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND 

FAMILY SERVICES, 

 Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

M.C., 

 Defendant and Appellant. 

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Philip L. 

Soto, Judge. Affirmed. 

 Law Offices of Vincent W. Davis & Associates, Linda M. Nakamura and 

Vincent W. Davis for Defendant and Appellant. 

 John F. Krattli, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel and 

John C. Savittieri, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. 

 No appearance for Minors. 

* * * * * * 
2

 M.C. (Mother), the mother of B.D. and Z.L., appeals from dispositional orders 

declaring her two daughters to be dependent children within the meaning of Welfare and 

Institutions Code1 section 300 and removing them from her custody. Mother claims there 

was insufficient evidence to support jurisdiction based on Mother’s alcohol abuse. We 

affirm. 

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 

 On August 31, 2012, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family 

Services (the department) filed a petition on behalf of 15-year-old B.D. and three-yearold Z.L. As sustained, the petition alleged Mother had a history of alcohol abuse and was 

a current alcohol abuser, which rendered her incapable of providing regular care for the 

children. On occasions in 2012, Mother was under the influence of alcohol while the 

children were in Mother’s care and supervision. Mother had a criminal history of driving 

under the influence of alcohol. Mother’s alcohol abuse endangered and placed at risk the 

children’s physical safety. 

 The detention report indicated that B.D. was released to her father, Joel D. and 

Z.L. was released to her father, Jason L. Mother did not live with either of the fathers, 

who had joint physical and legal custody of their daughters. 

 The department received a referral on July 27, 2012 that B.D. was a victim of 

emotional abuse and general neglect by Mother, which placed Z.L. at risk. B.D. told the 

reporting party that Mother abused alcohol. On July 21, 2012, at about 3:00 a.m., B.D. 

returned to Mother’s home with Claudia D., her stepmother. Claudia D. reported that 

they were returning home from a family celebration. She stated that when she and B.D. 

arrived at Mother’s house, there was a party taking place. There were about 15 or 20 

people, who appeared intoxicated, in Mother’s house. She also observed that there were 

boxes of beer in the street and three or four males were drinking in the back of a truck. 

 

1 All further statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code unless 

otherwise indicated. 
3

 Claudia D. stated that when maternal Aunt Kelly approached her, Kelly appeared 

to be intoxicated, with watery eyes and slurred speech. Kelly said: “This is not 

[Mother’s] fault; this is my fault.” 

 In an interview conducted on July 27, 2012, B.D. related that on the night of the 

incident, she went back inside the house and asked everyone to leave the house. She got 

into a verbal altercation with Kelly’s boyfriend. B.D. could not find Mother in the house, 

however, Mother arrived home with a group of women while B.D. was looking for her. 

B.D. left the house with Claudia D. and stayed that night with her. 

 Mother picked up B.D. from Joel D.’s house on July 22, 2012 at 1:30 p.m. B.D. 

said she could not smell alcohol on Mother’s breath. But, while they were on the way 

home, Mother threw up in the car. Mother said it was because she had eaten cheese fries, 

but B.D. was worried that Mother threw up because Mother had been drinking. 

 When B.D. realized that the reporting party would contact the department, she 

stopped talking. B.D. had become parental towards Z.L. because she took care of her 

sibling. B.D. was concerned that Z.L. would be taken away from Mother, and she did not 

want the department to intervene again in the family. 

 The department intervened and removed the children from Mother to ensure the 

children remained safe and that concerns were addressed. The department was concerned 

because Mother had recently received voluntary maintenance services, which had only 

recently ended. Mother had resumed excessive drinking and remained in denial of 

having an alcohol abuse problem, which endangered the children’s physical and 

emotional well being. 

 B.D. reported that after the voluntary family maintenance closed Mother would 

have “a beer or a couple of beers.” Mother drank “‘maybe one day out of the week,’ and 

has ‘1, or 2, or maybe 3 beers.’” According to B.D., beer did not intoxicate Mother 

because she acted fine or normal with a couple of beers. Rather, the problem arose when 

Mother drank liquor. When Mother drank liquor, her eyes appeared closed and she lost 

her balance. B.D. denied that Mother drank in front of Z.L. 
4

 B.D. stated there was only one incident where she saw Mother drink and drive. 

According to B.D., it was a “long time ago” when she had been babysitting Z.L. and a 

child of one of Mother’s friends. When Mother and the friend returned, B.D. knew 

Mother was “a little tipsy” so B.D. made Mother drink some coffee. 

 B.D. said Mother “hardly goes out” if B.D. and Z.L. are at home. Mother went 

out about once a week. If Mother went out, Z.L was with Maternal Grandmother, A.S. 

Z.L. was usually at Maternal Grandmother’s house because Mother worked from 

8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. B.D. stated she wanted Z.L. to be safe. 

She referred to her own “‘difficult childhood.’” B.D. did not want Z.L. “‘to go through 

the same things’” that B.D. did. She stated that Mother’s drinking and boyfriends were 

the difficult things. Mother’s latest boyfriend was someone named Alex but B.D. was 

not sure if Mother and Alex were still together. He was not living with them and B.D. 

had not seen him since the voluntary family maintenance. Alex texted her sometimes but 

it was nothing inappropriate. Mother had boyfriends who came and went and most of 

them treated her well. B.D. stated she was worried about the referral because she did not 

want Z.L. removed from Mother’s home. B.D. was upset by her father’s reaction to the 

current incident. B.D. was fine about going to Mother’s house and thought her father was 

“‘very overprotective.’” 

In an interview on July 27, 2012, B.D.’s father said Mother “‘doesn’t grasp it.’” 

He thought B.D. was worried about Z.L., was confused and protective of Mother. A part 

of B.D. wanted to be at Mother’s house because she “‘want[ed] to be a party animal, just 

like [Mother].’” 

 An emergency response case social worker, Dilhara Fernando, who investigated a 

June 2012 referral of neglect against Mother was interviewed. Fernando reported that her 

impression of Mother was that she drinks, but not around the children. She did not think 

Mother got drunk around the children. Mother took Z.L. to the Maternal Grandmother’s 

house when Mother went out. There were “definite custody issues at play.” Fernando 
5

could not prove anything so the referral was closed. All parties had been very 

cooperative. 

 Mother was interviewed on July 31, 2012 and reported she had a DUI conviction 

in 2005. Mother took classes and attended Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. She was 

arrested in 2011 on an outstanding warrant for the DUI conviction because she had not 

finished paying the fine. Mother had “recently” completed paying the fine so there were 

no outstanding arrest warrants. 

 Mother denied having a problem with alcohol, but said, “‘honestly now, I’m 

scared to be around it.’” Mother volunteered, “‘[a]fter all of this, I’ve come a long 

way.’” Mother said she “drink[s] on occasion,” but if she was going to drink, she did it 

when the children were gone. She said she had only drank a handful of times in the 

preceding five to six months and when she drank an average of two alcoholic beverages 

during or after dinner, she felt “‘a little buzzed, because [her] tolerance isn’t there.’” 

 Mother indicated that on the day of the incident, she went out in the evening. B.D. 

told her she might spend the night with her father because they were getting home so late. 

Mother said her sister Kelly had a key to Mother’s house and invited people over without 

Mother’s knowledge. Mother said she was asleep in the back of the car because they had 

to wait so long at Jack in the Box. She had two drinks at dinner that night, one beer at a 

party and denied being drunk. Mother fell asleep because she was tired. She wished 

Claudia D. and B.D. had seen her in person so they would have seen that Mother was not 

drunk. Mother denied being hung over when she vomited the next day. Mother said she 

would not do anything to jeopardize her children. Mother said she made it a point not to 

drink around them. B.D. had told Mother that B.D. would be late so she figured B.D. 

would not be coming home. Mother submitted to an on demand drug/alcohol test on 

July 31, 2012 and tested negative. 

 Jason L. confirmed that Z.L. was with him on the night of the incident. He said 

that he did not feel that Z.L. was 100 percent safe with Mother. Around July 4, 2012, 

Z.L. told her stepmother, Deanna L., that Mother was drinking beer. Jason L. was 
6

concerned about the different people coming in and out of Z.L.’s life such as different 

boyfriends and about Mother’s judgment in whom she chose to have around the children. 

When Jason L. was in a relationship with Mother, she would be so intoxicated at times 

that he had to care for B.D. and Z.L. by himself. Jason L. felt better when B.D. was 

present because she looked out for Z.L., who was too young to care for herself. 

 Jason L. ended his two-year on and off again relationship with Mother because of 

her drinking and desire to go out and party. He reported that one drink was never enough 

for Mother. Although Mother did not drink every day, when she did drink, it was to the 

point of excess. During the voluntary family maintenance period, Jason L. was 

concerned about Mother’s appearance at times when they were exchanging Z.L. Mother 

looked as though she had been out all night. When he reported Mother to the prior 

caseworker, the issue was cleared up and Mother began to look appropriate during the 

exchanges. Jason L. knew that B.D. had to take care of Mother in the past. He was 

worried about Mother’s judgment when she drank because she allowed various men into 

the children’s lives. B.D. and Z.L. might be targeted or abused by others because Mother 

allowed into the house unknown people who drank excessively. 

 At a team decision making meeting on August 24, 2012, both fathers continued to 

express concern that Mother’s drinking had been an ongoing issue. Joel D. reported that 

he had known Mother since she was 15 or 16 years old. After they had been married 

about three or four years, Mother’s drinking got worse. Mother hid her drinking from 

Joel D. Early in their marriage, Mother was intoxicated and wrecked the car but she 

denied that she was intoxicated. 

 Mother claimed she did not have a drinking problem. Mother said she had “‘made 

mistakes in the past,’” but since the voluntary family maintenance was opened, she had 

not made mistakes. Mother thought that the department continued to receive referrals 

because Jason L. wanted custody of Z.L. 

 One of Mother’s friends, who was interviewed on August 24, 2012, asked if it was 

okay if she did not answer some of the questions. The friend said she had known Mother 
7

six or eight years. The friend knew Mother pretty well. The friend was with Mother on 

July 21, 2012. The friend had no concerns about the children when they were in 

Mother’s care. 

 B.D.’s former therapist, Kelly Anderson, said B.D. was supposed to receive 

individual therapy during the voluntary family maintenance period but she never 

enrolled. B.D. agreed to individual therapy after the case closed. B.D. told the therapist 

that she was concerned that Alex was coming to the home again after the case closed. 

B.D. thought Alex was a bad influence on Mother and noticed Mother’s behavior 

changed when Alex was around. 

 The social worker, who supervised Mother’s voluntary family maintenances 

services, was interviewed. The social worker reported that Mother had been compliant 

and had done well. However, the department continued to receive referrals about 

Mother. The social worker said Mother “seemed to be ‘up to her old ways again.’” 

 At the team decision making meeting, it was discussed that removal of the 

children from Mother’s custody might be warranted because of the department’s concern 

that Mother had an alcohol problem, which she denied. It was also discussed that the 

department had provided Mother with voluntary family services, just months prior, but 

was continuing to receive referrals for the same concerns. The children were 

subsequently removed from Mother’s custody and placed with their respective fathers. 

 Mother had two prior referrals. On September 6, 2011, the department received a 

referral that B.D. was at Mother’s home, when Mother was passed out in the bathroom. 

B.D. had to take care of Mother. Prior to passing out, Mother had an argument with her 

live-in boyfriend Alex, who had anger problems. Mother and Alex had been out partying 

and he left. A friend drove B.D. and Mother home. Mother had been drinking and then 

went into the bathroom where she passed out. B.D. said Mother partied every weekend. 

On one occasion, B.D. missed school because she had to watch Z.L. While the referral 

was being investigated, Mother was arrested for an outstanding warrant. Mother was 

asked to drug test on Tuesday November 1, 2011. Mother said she did not drug test on 
8

that date because she was arrested on a warrant for an old DUI conviction from 2005. 

However, Mother was not arrested until 10:13 p.m. that date, which indicated Mother 

intentionally did not drug test. 

 The September 6, 2011 referral alleging general neglect was substantiated and 

resulted in a voluntary family maintenance case. Mother was required to randomly drug 

test, attend Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, and participate in individual counseling and 

in a family preservation program. The family received voluntary family maintenance 

services from November 2011 through May 2012. 

 On June 14, 2012, the department received a referral alleging general neglect and 

emotional abuse of the children. The caller observed a lot of beer cans on Mother’s front 

porch. Mother resumed drinking as soon as the voluntary family maintenance case 

closed in May 2012. Alex also moved back into Mother’s home after the case closed. 

Mother did not pay attention to the children when she drank. B.D. took care of Z.L when 

Mother was drunk. Mother’s mood and temperament changed when she drank. Mother’s 

mood was up and down and she slept late in the day. Mother stayed up late partying and 

allowed the children to stay up late. Mother allegedly took the children with her while 

she was drinking and partying. Mother had a purple bruise on her chest. The caller 

thought that Alex had caused the bruise. Because Mother and B.D. denied the 

allegations, the June 14, 2012 referral was closed as unfounded. 

 On August 31, 2012, the juvenile court ordered the children detained from Mother 

and released to their respective fathers. The court ordered Mother monitored visits with 

the children with discretion for the department to liberalize visits to unmonitored visits 

with B.D. but not Z.L. 

 In September 2012 for the jurisdiction/disposition hearing, the department 

reported that B.D. was interviewed about Mother’s alcohol abuse. B.D. stated that about 

10 years ago, “‘it was not fun growing up with [her] mom.’” B.D. had “‘seen things’” 

she should not have seen. B.D. said, “‘I am not supposed to take care of my mom and 

not see things.’” Mother’s boyfriends would come and go. B.D. did “‘not think any 
9

child should see their mom drunk.’” Mother would get emotional and her eyes would get 

drowsy. Mother’s speech would be slurred and Mother would be stumbling. According 

to B.D., Mother had been doing this since B.D. was five years old. B.D.’s first memory 

was when she was six and living with Maternal Grandmother. B.D. woke up around 

2:00 a.m. and could not find Mother. B.D. called Joel D., who picked her up. The next 

day, Mother blocked Joel D.’s number so that no telephone calls to Joel D.’s number 

could be made from the house. 

 B.D. said she would see her family drinking and just grew up around it. Mother 

went out a lot after her parents were divorced. When she was six years old, B.D. 

remembered that when Mother came home, she knew Mother had been drinking. Mother 

would drink in front of B.D. Mother would leave Z.L. with Maternal Grandmother. 

 When B.D. was about nine years old, Mother’s then boyfriend, Victor, would hit 

Mother. B.D. never saw Victor hit Mother. However, B.D. heard Mother tell Victor, 

“You do not have to hit me.” When B.D. went into the room and threatened to call the 

police, Victor left. B.D. explained that Joel D. misunderstood because he thought B.D. 

said that Mother said Victor did not have to “rape” Mother. 

 When B.D. was about twelve years old and at her softball trophy ceremony, 

Mother and other parents had been drinking. Mother’s words were slurred and she got 

very emotional. B.D. told Mother to stop drinking. B.D. subsequently called her father, 

and told him what happened. When Joel D. arrived, Mother became more emotional and 

started crying. Mother raised her voice causing B.D. to start crying. Mother asked B.D. 

why she was doing this to her. B.D. thought Mother “‘does not understand.’” 

 Sometime in 2009 or 2010, Mother and her friends came home from a club. 

Mother had been drinking at the club. B.D. did not think Mother was drunk but knew 

Mother had been drinking. B.D. did not want Mother to drive because Mother “‘was 

tipsy like she drank one too many.’” 

 On a different occasion, B.D., Mother, Alex and others went out to a restaurant. 

Mother had two martinis. Alex then drove them to a friend’s house and Mother 
10

continued to drink until she could not take care of herself. Mother’s eyes were drowsy; 

Mother was mumbling things and her speech was slurred. B.D. said that she could tell 

Mother was drunk. Mother went into the restroom. B.D. subsequently tried to get 

Mother out of the restroom. When Mother finally opened the door, she was sitting on the 

floor. Alex and B.D. had to pick up Mother and put her on a couch. B.D. went outside at 

2:00 a.m., crying and wishing she was somewhere else. Alex put Mother in the car and 

drove them home. Alex put Mother to bed and B.D. removed her shoes. B.D. stated: “‘I 

want this to go away. I do not want any more social workers. I want to go home with my 

mom and go back the way it was. I miss [Z.L.] and seeing her on the weekends is not 

enough. If [Jason L.] keeps [Z.L.] I will not be able to see her again.’” 

 Mother denied statements by Joel D. that she was intoxicated when she was in the 

car accident. According to Mother, she had a “fender bender” because she was 

“emotional” after Joel D. called and told her he was in urgent care with B.D. Mother 

denied being drunk in the park. Rather, B.D. wanted to leave and called Joel D. to pick 

her up from the park. Mother admitted she had a drink earlier at the park; but they “‘had 

been there all day and it started in the morning.’” Mother said it had nothing to do with 

her not being able to drive. Mother denied that she passed out in the bathroom of a 

friend’s house. Mother made the following statement: “‘That day we did go out to 

dinner and we did have a couple more drinks at my friend’s house and I did go to the 

restroom and it was late and I was tired and I came back out and decided it was time to go 

home.’” 

 Mother stated she “‘would drink on social events.’” This would happen when she 

did not have to take care of the children. She would drink “‘[a] couple of beers 

throughout the weekend.’” Mother denied drinking in front of the children. She drank in 

front of B.D. “‘years ago, but nothing in the last year or maybe longer.’” Mother added 

“‘[n]ot a lot like two or three beers.’” Mother claimed that when she drank in front of 

B.D. years ago, she “‘made it an issue not to do that again.’” 
11

 Mother said that when the July 21, 2012 incident occurred neither child was in her 

care. Mother was not certain that B.D. was coming home. B.D. said she left Mother’s 

home that night because “‘my sister and my friend[s] were home drinking and I told her 

that it was okay and I would pick her up the next day and figure out what was going on.’” 

 Mother stated she did not believe she needed additional services and had complied 

with the voluntary family maintenance case “‘in a timely fashion.’” The voluntary family 

maintenance case worker thought Mother was “‘one of the dream clients.’” Mother 

enrolled in an outpatient alcohol treatment program after the petition was filed. She 

tested negative for drugs and alcohol on July 31, 2012 and September 10 and 19, 2012. 

 Joel D. said that B.D. was three years old when Mother had the accident. Mother 

was sitting in the car. He could smell that she was intoxicated but Mother denied being 

intoxicated. However, she tried to get out of the car and could not stand. Mother passed 

out. During the time they were married, Mother would come home intoxicated; Joel D. 

could smell alcohol on Mother but she denied it. According to Joel D., he “‘had to deal 

with her alcohol and lying and being intoxicated for two years.’” He confirmed B.D.’s 

statements about the softball game. He also stated that Mother was a heavy drinker and 

that both maternal grandparents and family were heavy drinkers. They drank every day 

and at all hours of the day. B.D. told Joel D. that Mother had a boyfriend who smoked 

marijuana. In May or June 2012, B.D. told Joel D. that Mother was at someone else’s 

home drunk. Mother urinated on and threw up on herself. According to Joel D., B.D. 

heard Mother say to her then boyfriend “‘What are you going to rape me now?’” As 

previously noted, according to B.D., she said Mother said “hit” not “rape.” 

 Joel D. stated, “‘[Mother] has a problem with alcohol and she has always denied 

it. She needs to get help and realize that her drinking and relationships affect [B.D.]. I 

do not want to take [B.D.] away from her, but this cannot keep going on. I am worried 

about [B.D.] and worry that from her drinking that something will happen to [B.D.].’” 

 Claudia D. confirmed incidents where B.D. called Joel D. to pick her up when 

Mother was drunk. B.D. called Joel D. once when Mother was drunk and wearing a 
12

bikini and high heels. B.D. also called Claudia D. about an incident where Mother 

passed out on the bathroom floor at the friend’s home. Claudia D. also said Mother was 

on “My Space” and in every picture Mother had a drink. 

 Jason L. said Z.L. looked like a homeless person when she visited him. He had 

seen Mother drunk and fight with family members. The first and second time they met 

she looked intoxicated. Mother would drink “‘to the point of just being drunk.’” In May 

2008, Mother got drunk at a party and started to pull her top off. Jason L. told Mother to 

stop because B.D. was watching her. Mother vomited in the car on that date and had to 

be carried to bed when they arrived home. Jason L. thought Mother allowed “‘herself to 

look pretty bad in front of [B.D.].’” 

 When Z.L. was only a few months old, Jason L. would visit her. Mother came in 

with a twelve pack of Corona and three packs of tall cans of Bud Light for Maternal 

Grandmother. Mother looked “definitely” drunk and stumbled. Maternal Grandmother 

came and told Mother to let her take Z.L. Jason L. told Mother, “‘You’re ridiculous.’” 

 On May 16, 2010, Mother arrived to pick up Z.L. from Jason L. Mother arrived 

with her friends and a maternal aunt. Mother got out of the car, wobbling, laughing, and 

hanging on to her friends. In 2011, Mother threw one of Z.L.’s soiled diapers and wipes 

on Jason L.’s lawn. His wife, Deanna L., said Mother had glassy eyes and looked like 

she had been out partying all night. Mother told Jason L. that her relationship with Alex 

was violent. Alex purportedly carried guns and stabbed people. Jason L. observed Alex 

sleeping on Mother’s sofa in May 2012. He observed beer cans on Mother’s front porch 

in June 2012. Jason L. said Mother’s “‘drinking has always been a problem.’” Mother 

would be all right as long as the department was involved but would go back to her party 

ways once the department closed the case. 

 An unidentified person said that Mother was not passed out drunk in July 2012. 

She thought Mother was a really good mom, who did anything for her girls. She denied 

that Mother went out with the children. She thought the fathers were upset over having 
13

to pay child support. The unidentified person denied that Mother drank in the children’s 

presence; however, the person said she was not always with Mother. 

 Maternal Aunt, Berenice M. said that B.D. was not telling the truth. Berenice said 

Mother is not an alcoholic because Mother does not drink every day. Berenice described 

Mother as a social drinker. 

 Mother’s friend Livier G. said Mother was a social drinker and did not drink in 

front of the girls. She drove Mother home on July 21, 2012. They did not know that 

anyone was going to show up at Mother’s home. 

 The department recommended removal from Mother’s care and family 

reunification services based on Mother’s history of alcohol abuse including a DUI 

criminal conviction, witness statements, the July 21, 2012 incident and Mother’s denial 

of an alcohol problem. 

 In an addendum report, filed on September 28, 2012, the department reported that 

Jason L. elaborated on incidents when Mother appeared to have been drinking. Mother 

was often late or not home when it was time to exchange Z.L. Mother failed to provide a 

change of clothes for Z.L. when she was left with Maternal Grandmother. Mother also 

dressed Z.L. in tattered clothing or in clothing that was too small. Mother also continued 

to place Z.L in diapers when it was no longer necessary. Jason L. thought Mother’s 

drinking affected her ability to take care of Z.L. and resulted in neglecting her. 

 Maternal Aunt Y.B. said Mother loves her children. Mother goes to church. 

Mother is hard working. She did not know about the accusation; but, she knew Mother 

was trusting in God right now. 

 At the jurisdiction hearing, Mother submitted on the department’s reports to the 

juvenile court. The court sustained the petition as amended. The court set the matter for 

a contested disposition hearing. The children remained placed with their respective 

fathers. 

 In an October 2012 interim review report, the department recommended that 

physical custody of the children be removed from Mother. The department also 
14

recommended that Mother be ordered to: participate in individual and conjoint 

counseling with the children if the therapist deemed it appropriate; complete a parenting 

program; and submit to weekly alcohol testing. 

 At the contested disposition hearing, Mother called the dependency investigator as 

a witness. The investigator testified that he assessed the children to be in substantial 

danger of harm if they were returned to Mother’s custody. His assessment was based on 

statements from B.D. and the fathers, a review of the voluntary family maintenance case, 

and Mother’s criminal history. He testified that Mother was participating in an outpatient 

Alcoholics Anonymous program, a parenting program and drug and alcohol testing. He 

was not aware of the exact number of Mother’s negative alcohol tests; however, he had 

documentation that Mother had tested negative once and had no positive tests. He did not 

contact Mother’s alcohol counselor to ascertain her attendance and progress. 

 Mother testified that she was currently participating in alcohol counseling, 

Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and parenting classes. Mother submitted to drug and 

alcohol testing through the department and the alcohol program. 

 Mother testified that she was a “recovering alcoholic.” Mother meant by 

“recovering” that she had “accepted that perhaps there is a problem.” Mother was 

“taking the steps to correct it and make sure that it doesn’t happen again.” Mother had 

her last drink in July 2012. When Mother previously tried to address the alcoholism, she 

“didn’t think it was as significant. I mean I didn’t think it was a problem.” 

 The department counsel wanted to call B.D. to testify about why she terminated a 

recent visit with Mother. However, the juvenile court ruled that B.D. did not have to be 

called because she was old enough to know if she wanted to leave a visit. 

 The children’s counsel argued for removal from Mother’s custody and 

unmonitored visits between Mother and B.D. and monitored visits for Z.L. Mother’s 

counsel asserted the children should not be removed from Mother’s care because the 

department had failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence there was a substantial 

risk of danger to the children. Mother was participating in programs which the 
15

department had not investigated. There were a number of safety measures in place to 

protect the children if they were returned to Mother. The measures included: court 

supervision; the department’s involvement; B.D.’s age and ability to report if Mother did 

have problems; and the fathers’ interacting with their children and Mother. Counsel 

asserted there were less restrictive alternatives to removal given Mother’s participation in 

programs to address her now admitted alcoholism. Fathers’ attorneys both joined the 

department’s recommendations. Both fathers indicated that Mother had problems with 

alcohol which needed to be addressed before the children were returned to Mother. 

B.D.’s father did not think unmonitored visits should be granted until Mother showed 

consistent sobriety for at least six months. 

 Prior to ruling on the matter, the juvenile court made the following statement. 

“Notwithstanding, when you step back and you look at the picture as a whole, it is a 

situation with Mother who has got a chronic alcoholism problem. This is an incident that 

happened late July of this year. So not even three months ago. And this problem has 

been going on for many years as demonstrated by statements from the child, [B.D.], that 

are in the initial report and the disposition report. And not only was Mother in July not 

facing up to the problem. Instead saying that, you know, she went to Jack in the Box or 

some fast food place and fell asleep in the car and things of that nature. The place was 

with many strangers in the house, beer and alcohol in the house, open containers 

available to her as well as everybody else. They are obviously having a pretty good party 

at the house.” 

 The juvenile court also indicated Mother’s relatives and friends all thought 

nothing was wrong and wanted to cover up for Mother. The court commended Mother 

for her admission of alcoholism. The court also credited Mother with having all negative 

tests since July 2012. However, the juvenile court stated: “But three months of negative 

tests do not negate all the years of the alcohol problem that an adult taking care of young 

children, a 16-year-old, a three-year-old, has to deal with in order to make sure that they 

are safe.” The court stated its concern was the children’s safety not just to return the 
16

children to Mother. The court stated it was judging whether the children would be safe in 

Mother’s home “not knowing whether or not [she was] going to crack open [her] next 

brewski and fall off the wagon.” The court told Mother that, if she was really interested 

in sobriety, the court supported her. The court did not support Mother if she was just 

interested in getting the children back and keep doing what she was doing before the 

incident. 

 The juvenile court then found by clear and convincing evidence the children were 

dependents and returning them to Mother’s custody would create a substantial risk of 

harm. The court ordered the children removed from Mother’s custody. The children 

were placed in the homes of their respective fathers. Mother was given monitored visits. 

Mother was ordered to: attend a drug/alcohol program with random weekly testing; 

participate in a 12-step program; and complete a parenting program. Mother filed a 

timely notice of appeal from the dispositional order. 

DISCUSSION 

 Mother claims the jurisdictional finding is not supported by substantial evidence 

that the children were presently at a substantial risk of harm due to her alcohol abuse. 

The juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional findings are reviewed for substantial 

evidence. (In re Mariah T. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 428, 438; In re P.A. (2006) 144 

Cal.App.4th 1339, 1344.) We review the determination in a light most favorable to the 

challenged order resolving all evidentiary conflicts in favor of the order. (In re Alexis E.

(2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 438, 450–451; In re Casey D. (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 38, 52–53.) 

 The primary purpose of dependency statutes is to protect children by safeguarding 

their physical and emotional well-being. (§ 300.2; In re Nolan W. (2009) 45 Cal.4th 

1217, 1228; T.W. v. Superior Court (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 30, 42–43.) Section 300.2 

provides in that respect: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the purpose of the 

provisions of this chapter relating to dependent children is to provide maximum safety 

and protection for children who are currently being physically, sexually, or emotionally 

abused, being neglected, or being exploited, and to ensure the safety, protection, and 
17

physical and emotional well-being of children who are at risk of that harm. This safety, 

protection, and physical and emotional well-being may include provision of a full array 

of social and health services to help the child and family and to prevent reabuse of 

children. The focus shall be on the preservation of the family as well as the safety, 

protection, and physical and emotional well-being of the child. The provision of a home 

environment free from the negative effects of substance abuse is a necessary 

condition for the safety, protection and physical and emotional well-being of the 

child. Successful participation in a treatment program for substance abuse may be 

considered in evaluating the home environment. In addition, the provisions of this 

chapter ensuring the confidentiality of proceedings and records are intended to protect the 

privacy rights of the child.” (Boldface added.) 

 The record contains overwhelming evidence that Mother’s home was not free of 

the negative effects of alcohol. Mother has a history of alcohol abuse which dates back 

to B.D.’s early childhood and has encompassed Z.L.’s entire life. Mother had a 2005 

DUI criminal conviction. Mother did not complete the probation for the conviction, 

which led to a November 2011 bench warrant arrest. 

 Both fathers disclosed that Mother’s drinking problem was ongoing. Joel D. said 

that Mother, who was then 33 years old, had been drinking excessively since she was 

around 20 years old. While they were married, Mother was involved in a car accident 

where she was driving while intoxicated. B.D. was about three years old at the time. 

According to Joel D., Mother and her entire family were heavy drinkers. B.D. stated “I 

would see my family drinking and I just grew up around it.” B.D. did not want Z.L. to 

“go through the same things.” 

 B.D. talked about how her childhood was marred by Mother’s consumption of 

alcohol. She recounted early childhood incidents where Mother was drunk, passed out, 

throwing up, yelling at B.D., mumbling to herself, talking with slurred speech, stumbling, 

and unable to care for herself. B.D. and others would have to put Mother to bed. B.D. 

also would have to periodically call Joel D. to pick her up when B.D. was not 
18

comfortable getting into the car with Mother after she had been drinking. B.D. said she 

had seen things she should not have seen. In numerous statements, witnesses disclosed 

Mother’s alcoholism had resulted in B.D. having to be the family caretaker including 

caring for Mother when she was drunk. 

 Jason L. stated that when he met Mother she was drinking. Mother would just 

keep drinking until she got drunk. He also provided a number of examples of Mother’s 

lack of care and neglect of Z.L. during their exchanges. Mother arrived late for the 

exchanges of Z.L. At times, Mother was drunk during the exchanges. Mother dressed 

Z.L. in tattered clothing which did not fit. 

 There was evidence that Mother’s judgment including her selection of male 

companions also placed the children at risk. Two of the companions hit Mother and one 

smoked marijuana in Mother’s home in the children’s presence. B.D. was unable to 

return home on July 21, 2012 because of Mother’s drinking. When B.D. arrived home at 

3:00 a.m. from a paternal family function, Mother was nowhere to be found. Yet, 

Mother’s home was full of intoxicated people that B.D. did not know. When Mother 

eventually returned home, she was passed out in the back of a car. 

 Moreover, the record demonstrates that Mother’s participation in court ordered 

programs for three months including negative alcohol tests do not require a different 

result. When the July 21, 2012 incident occurred, Mother had just completed two months 

of a voluntary family maintenance program. Mother also continued to consume alcohol 

after her 2006 criminal conviction and completion of an alcohol treatment program. 

Mother continued to deny she had a drinking problem up to and including the October 

2012 disposition hearing where Mother testified she had “accepted that perhaps there is a 

problem.” The juvenile court’s determination the children were at substantial risk of 

harm by Mother’s alcohol abuse was supported by substantial evidence. 
19

DISPOSITION

 The orders under review are affirmed in their entirety. 

 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS. 

_____________________, J. *

 FERNS 

We concur: 

____________________________, Acting P. J. 

 ASHMANN-GERST 

____________________________, J. 

 CHAVEZ 

 

* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to 

article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.