of extreme neglect"); see also V.S.B. v. State, Dep't of Health & Soc. Ser 95 P.2d 205, 209 (Alaska 2000) ("[NJoth-ing resolved at the adjudication stage foreclosed a parent from fully litig Soc. Servs., Div. of Family & Youth Servs., 79 P.3d 50, 54-55 (Alaska 2003) (rejecting argument that because terrorizing conduct was not directed at the child or took place before the child's birth, the CINA statute was not satisfied, and holding that father's "violent tendencies ... pose[d] a risk of future harm" to his child). 31 . Instead, Leo joins Barbara's briefing related to this subsection of the CINA statute, which addresses only whether Barbara's substance abuse supports a finding that the children are in need of aid. 32 . See Jeff A.C., Jr. v. State, 117 P.3d 697, 703 (Alaska 2005) (<HOLDING>). 33 . AS 47.10.011(10). 34 . See Martin N., 79
recognizing duty of parent to control conduct of child holding that ocs is not required to wait to intervene until a child has suffered actual harm before requesting a finding that a child is in need of aid holding that only one statutory basis is required to find a child in need of aid holding an unborn child is not a child for purposes of criminal prosecution of mistreatment of a child holding that a superior court can adjudicate a child as a child in need of aid based on the acts of just one parent