Opinion ID: 1908241
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The mother's attention to the daughter's needs.

Text: It is essentially undisputed that G.H. hugged and kissed her daughter, took her to the park and to museums, and attended conscientiously to her daughter's material needs. According to all of the witnesses, E.H. was clean and appropriately dressed and well-nourished. There was no indication of physical abuse or unkind treatment. [10] Indeed, according to one defense witness, G.H. has a way with kids. The mother also recognized that E.H. was suffering from developmental delays. Dr. Weissman, the District's lead-off witness, testified that G.H. followed up on various referrals suggested by him. Indeed, Dr. Weissman stated: It is correct that she certainly showed great concern for her daughter. It's correct that she ... was willing to pursue these other evaluations and took her daughter to see the other specialists.... My observations are that Ms. H. genuinely loves her daughter.... Not a question in my mind about that. The trial judge recognized that the mother's intentions were good and that the petition in this case was not based on a pattern of neglect, such as a failure to provide food, clothing or shelter. Rather, according to the judge, the petition had a narrower theory, which was that [G.H.'s] psychiatric illness prevented her from providing the proper parental care to her child.