When asked at the disposition hearing if she was seeing a therapist in Arkansas, mother replied that she was, but she could not provide the therapist's name. The court specifically found that mother's testimony lacked credibility. Mother was required under her case plan to continue to follow her therapist's recommendations, and her therapist recommended continued therapy in Arkansas. She said she was seeing someone but could not remember the name. Giving proper deference to the factfinder, we cannot say the finding was clearly erroneous.
Mother next argues that the ultimate best-interests determination is unsupported by the evidence.
This court reviews the ultimate best-interests determination for an abuse of discretion. Mother asserts that placing the children in Arkansas would inhibit reunification. She also contends that placement with her mother is not in the children's best interests because her mother failed to protect her from sexual abuse when she was growing up, reasoning that if the maternal grandmother failed to protect her daughter, she might also fail to protect her grandchildren. While mother's concerns appear colorable, it does not appear that the district court abused discretion in finding that transfer of legal custody to the maternal grandmother was in the children's best interests. The evidence in the record shows that the children are adjusting well and that the grandmother, a licensed foster parent, provides a stable, consistent living environment accompanied by a sense of belonging.