Opinion ID: 2521422
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Token efforts

Text: Pursuant to NRS 128.109(1)(a), because the children were in foster care for over thirty consecutive months, a presumption arose that Cristan and Vincent had demonstrated only token efforts to reunify with their children. The district court also considered additional evidence demonstrating that the parents had failed to make any attempt to overcome their respective faults or to reunify with their children. The district court found that Cristan's failure to adequately address her drug problem, even after DCFS had provided extensive drug rehabilitation services, demonstrated that she had made only a token effort to become a fit parent. Similarly, the district court concluded that, despite his participation in numerous anger management courses, Vincent had also failed to adequately address his anger problems. The district court also considered that, while Vincent testified that he had urged his attorney to get the matter back to court, Vincent failed to provide a reasonable explanation as to why he did not contact the children through the foster parents or DCFS. Similarly, Vincent's argument that DCFS's animosity towards him prevented him from communicating with his children is unreasonable. Vincent's failure to demonstrate his ability to provide continuous long-term care for the children supported the district court's conclusion that he had made only token efforts to eliminate risks to the children and to become a fit parent. Accordingly, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the district court's finding that Cristan and Vincent had made only token efforts to reunify with their children.