cases "does not require courts to separately hear and consider evidence pertaining to unfitness and best interests" nor does it require "two different sets of findings and conclusions") Accordingly, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion when it determined that termination of Mother's parental rights was in the best interests of the Children. IL Denial of Mother's Motion for Substitute Counsel 11 Mother next argues that the juvenile court erroneously denied her day-of-trial motion for substitute counsel because the "total" breakdown in communication between her and her appointed counsel (Counsel) amounted to a deprivation of her statutory right to effective counsel, see Utah Code Ann. § 78A, 6-1111(1)(a) (LexisNexis 2012); In re C.C., 2002 UT App 149, ¶ 9, 48 P.3d 244 (<HOLDING>). Mother does not dispute that the juvenile
holding because right to counsel is constitutionally guaranteed in parental termination proceeding effective assistance of counsel is also constitutionally required recognizing that the statutory right to counsel in parental termination cases requires that the appointed counsel provide effective assistance recognizing that a criminal defendants right to counsel is the right to the effective assistance of counsel holding that a parents statutory right to counsel in termination proceedings guarantees the right to effective counsel holding that in parental termination proceedings the parent is entitled to effective assistance of counsel