This is an appeal from an order of the juvenile court terminating the mother’s parental rights to S. B. and S. B., twin three-year-olds. The mother contends there was not clear and convincing evidence that the past deprivation of the children was likely to continue or will not likely be remedied by the mother, there was not clear and convincing evidence that the continued deprivation would likely cause serious physical, mental, emotional or moral harm to the children, there was not clear and convincing evidence that the termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the children, and the juvenile court erred in denying her motion for new trial on the grounds of her non-attendance at the termination hearing and ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We find no reversible error and affirm the juvenile court’s order terminating the mother’s parental rights. The evidence presented at the parental rights termination hearing revealed the following: On January 24, 2004, the Hall County Department of Family and Children Services the “Department” received a report that the mother had been arrested for outstanding criminal warrants in Michigan. Following a deprivation hearing, the juvenile court found three-month-old S. B. and S. B.1 deprived and placed them in the Department’s custody. This order was not appealed. The juvenile court incorporated as part of its order a case plan requiring the mother to resolve her criminal charges, keep the Department apprised of her legal status, comply with her probation, obtain all available benefits, maintain stable employment and housing for six months, and provide written verification.
On June 21, 2004, the Department submitted a written family assessment, psychological evaluations of the children, and a relative search to the juvenile court. The family assessor reported that the mother had been arrested in 1998 for check fraud, was arrested in 2002 for embezzlement after stealing $3,000 in traveler’s checks, went on the run from police, and was now awaiting sentencing in Michigan. The juvenile court subsequently found that the mother’s incarceration negatively affected her relationship with the children and extended the Department’s custody of the children. The court entered orders adopting updated case plans.
