than focusing on the bond between the parent and child. This interpretation is also consistent with the views of the other appellate courts: Although the children were placed with a relative, the availability of relative placement does not mean that termination of the mother’s parental rights is not the least restrictive means of preventing harm. Courts have frequently determined that the availability of a relative placement is not the dispositive consideration under the least restrictive means test. See In re Z.C., 88 So.3d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); S.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 891 So.2d 1068, 1070 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); R.L. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 955 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); see also N.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 36 So.3d 776, 779 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (<HOLDING>). S.M., 190 So.3d at 129. In termination of
holding that a mother and her two children failed to establish a  1983 claim where there was no evidence that threats made to the mother were directly aimed at the relationship between parent and child holding that the existence of possible placement with a relative is irrelevant to the least restrictive means test where dcf made reasonable but unsuccessful efforts to rehabilitate the mother and provide services to her and her children with the goal of reuniting them as a functional family holding birth mothers samesex partner was a presumed mother    because she received the children into her home and openly held them out as her natural children holding the evidence was sufficient to support termination under subsection n when after release from prison the defendant was advised of visitation but only visited with his children twice and made no further efforts to be involved with them and a case worker testified that all reasonable efforts were made to return the children to the parents holding mothers due process rights were not violated when her appointed counsel was allowed to withdraw and hearing was held without mother because the record showed mother did not inform counsel of her whereabouts after moving thereby frustrating counsels efforts to contact her and because mother was properly served with notice of the termination hearing