The evidence indicated that while Mother's condition could be treated, it would be a long-term process as it was doubtful Mother would be proactive in changing her current parenting practices. Mother was referred to a psychologist for care, but failed to keep many of her appointments, citing such reasons as the need to visit her boyfriend. This court will affirm an order terminating parental rights unless no substantial evidence supports it, unless it is against the weight of the evidence, unless it erroneously declares the law, or unless it erroneously applies the law. In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence supporting an order, this court considers the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the order. Further, due regard is given to the trial court's opportunity to judge the credibility of witnesses.
Mother raises one point on appeal.
Under Section 211.447.5, a trial court may terminate parental rights if it finds termination is in the child's best interests and when it appears by clear, cogent and convincing evidence that one or more statutory grounds for termination exists. The existence of even one statutory ground for termination is sufficient if termination is in the child's best interests. The trial court, however, did not reach such a conclusion regarding Mother's mental health. The trial court did find, and the evidence supported such a finding, that Mother suffered from a possible learning disorder and a personality disorder. However, the trial court ultimately concluded that although it would be a long-term process to deal with some of Mother's issues, Mother's condition could be treated.