Following a hearing, the juvenile court terminated the father’s parental rights to J. L. C.1 In his sole enumeration of error, the father contends that the requirements of OCGA § 15-11-94 were not met and thus the trial court erred in terminating his parental rights. For the following reasons, we affirm.In considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in a termination of parental rights case, the question is whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the natural parent’s rights to custody have been lost. In making that determination, this Court reviews the evidence in a light most favorable to the lower court’s judgments and we neither weigh evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses; rather, we defer to the trial court’s fact-finding and affirm unless the appellate standard is not met.Citations and punctuation omitted. In the Interest of R. S. , 287 Ga. App. 228 651 SE2d 156 2007. So viewed, the record shows that J. L. C. was born on February 3, 2005. At that time, the mother already had five other children, one of whom was the biological child of the father. All of the children had been taken into the custody of the Department of Family and Children Services DFCS.2 The father’s other child was living with a relative. Immediately after J. L. C.’s birth, she was taken into DFCS’s custody based upon allegations of the mother’s chronic, unrehabilitated drug abuse, the father’s ongoing probation for drug charges and unrehabilitated substance abuse, and the parents’ non-compliance with the case plan for the other children. In March 2005, both parents consented to the juvenile court’s order finding J. L. C. to be deprived and approving nonreunification in accordance with DFCS’s permanency plan.
Although non-reunification had been adopted as the permanency plan, the parents indicated that “they wanted to work a plan” and asked what steps they needed to take in order to re-unite with J. L. C. In June 2006, the caseworker sent a letter to the parents informing them that they needed to complete six months of clean drug screens, maintain stable housing and employment, and complete a drug and alcohol assessment. Neither parent produced evidence of compliance with the goals indicated in the letter.
