The California Court of Appeal has upheld the termination of parental rights for R.G., a mother whose two adopted children were removed from her custody due to concerns about their safety and well-being. The court's decision, filed on November 12, 2026, affects R.G.'s son B.G., age 14, and daughter D.G., age 6, and emphasizes the importance of child welfare in dependency cases.

The court's ruling comes after a series of events that led to the children being taken from R.G.'s care. The case highlights the challenges faced by parents in the child welfare system and the court's responsibility to protect children from potential harm.

Background

R.G. adopted B.G. and D.G. in January 2023. Both children had experienced trauma and instability prior to their adoption and were receiving therapy. However, by August 2023, R.G. faced eviction due to nonpayment of rent and substance abuse issues. Following her eviction, R.G. and her children lived in a campground and later in a motel.

In September 2023, the children were detained after being found in a messy motel room under the care of R.G.'s 18-year-old daughter, who was reportedly under the influence of marijuana. The court ordered the children removed from R.G.'s custody and placed them with relatives. Reports indicated that R.G. misused adoption assistance funds to purchase drugs instead of providing for her children's basic needs.

The Ruling

The California Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the San Luis Obispo County Department of Social Services, affirming the termination of reunification services and parental rights. The court found that R.G. had not complied with court orders and had not made sufficient efforts to reunify with her children.

“The court did not err when it terminated visitation as to B.G.,” the ruling stated. “Mother’s actions caused B.G. stress and anxiety and he did not want contact with her.”

The court also addressed R.G.'s arguments regarding jurisdiction, stating that the juvenile court had the authority to make its decisions despite R.G.'s attempts to remove the case to federal court. The court emphasized that R.G. had not demonstrated extraordinary circumstances that would warrant extending reunification services beyond the 18-month limit.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the importance of child welfare in dependency cases and the court's role in making determinations that prioritize the best interests of children. The court's decision to terminate parental rights reflects a commitment to ensuring that children are placed in safe and stable environments.

The ruling may set a precedent for future cases involving the termination of parental rights, particularly in situations where a parent's conduct raises significant concerns about the child's safety and well-being. It underscores the necessity for parents in similar circumstances to engage with social services and adhere to court orders to maintain their parental rights.

What's Next

R.G. has the option to appeal the court's decision, although the ruling has already affirmed the termination of her parental rights. There are no related cases pending at this time. The court's decision is final unless further challenged in a higher court.