The mother of J. S. challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting an order from the Gwinnett County Juvenile Court finding her child deprived under OCGA § 15-11-2 8 A. Because the juvenile court’s ruling was supported by clear and convincing evidence of deprivation, we affirm. We review a trial court’s finding of deprivation in the light most favorable to the juvenile court’s judgment to determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the child was deprived. This Court neither weighs evidence nor determines the credibility of witnesses; rather, we defer to the trial court’s fact-finding and affirm unless the appellate standard is not met.1 So viewed, the record shows that in May 2007, J. S.’s mother and father separated when J. S.’s mother moved herself and J. S. to a shelter after alleging that the father abused the mother. The mother was granted a temporary protective order and awarded primary physical custody of J. S., and the father was awarded visitation. The father, who worked as a nurse, paid child support payments of $676 per month. In September 2007, the mother reported to a shelter worker and subsequently a social worker with the Department of Family and Children Services DFACS that a 12-year-old boy in the shelter had inappropriate sexual contact with J. S., then three years old. J. S. was taken to a child-advocate center for a forensic interview, and the allegation was ultimately determined to be unsubstantiated based on interviews with J. S., the boy, the mothers, and the shelter workers. Nevertheless, the 12-year-old boy was removed from J. S.’s shelter environment.
In October 2007, after a contempt hearing at which the mother was ordered to resume visitation she allegedly withheld, the mother reported to police that J. S. told her that her father had sexually abused her. DFACS intervened that night, and a physical exam was performed on J. S. at a medical clinic, her underwear was tested at a lab for male DNA, and another forensic interview was conducted. None of these investigations substantiated the allegation, and J. S. was provided with counseling sessions.
