Case Name: IN the INTEREST OF: J.R.D., J.D.D., D.M.D., A.T.D., and J.E.D.; Respondents, Missouri Department of Social Services, Children's Division, Respondent, v. M.Y.D., Appellant
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2017-05-23
Citations: 525 S.W.3d 566
Docket Number: WD 79861, WD 79862, WD 79862, WD 79864, and WD 79865
Parties: IN the INTEREST OF: J.R.D., J.D.D., D.M.D., A.T.D., and J.E.D.; Respondents, Missouri Department of Social Services, Children’s Division, Respondent, v. M.Y.D., Appellant.
Judges: Before Division Two: .Thomas H. Newton, P.J., James Edward Welsh, and Karen King Mitchell, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 525
Pages: 566–567

Head Matter:
IN the INTEREST OF: J.R.D., J.D.D., D.M.D., A.T.D., and J.E.D.; Respondents, Missouri Department of Social Services, Children’s Division, Respondent, v. M.Y.D., Appellant.
WD 79861, WD 79862, WD 79862, WD 79864, and WD 79865
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
ORDER FILED: May 23, 2017
Margaret Dean, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.
Sara Harrison, Jefferson City, MO, Anastacia Adamson, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Respondents.
Before Division Two: .Thomas H. Newton, P.J., James Edward Welsh, and Karen King Mitchell, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
Per Curiam:
M.Y.D., Mother, appeals a Jackson County juvenile court judgment terminating parental rights to five of her children. Mother challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the court's decision and whether it made the findings required by law; she also raises a statutory interpretation question.
We affirm. Rule 84.16(b).