State, Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. (In re B.S.), 697 So.2d 914 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). There was expert testimony that any caretaker changing the infant’s diaper should have been aware of the femur fracture, which appeared to be more than two weeks old. Thus the circuit court could reasonably conclude that one parent perpetrated the abuse and the other parent permitted the abuse or failed to timely seek appropriate medical treatment for the child. Further, the abuse of this infant on numerous occasions in the first two months of his life supports the trial court’s finding that termination of the parents’ rights is in this child’s manifest best interest and is the least restrictive means available to protect him from continued abuse. See In re T.M., 641 So.2d 410, 413 (Fla.1994) (<HOLDING>); see also § 39.806(2), Fla. Stat. (2002)
holding that in cases involving severe or continuing abuse or neglect the termination of parental rights without the use of plans or agreements is the least restrictive means holding that it need not discuss the trial courts findings concerning the manifest best interests of the children because it was reversing termination due to the departments failure to prove that the mother posed a substantial risk of significant harm and that termination was the least restrictive means holding that the clear and convincing standard provides appropriate due process in cases involving parental rights recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights holding that generally parents have a due process right to participate in a permanency hearing because the opportunity to defend against charges of abuse and neglect may prevent a termination of parental rights