issues of material fact in response to the allegations of neglect. We conclude that no genuine issues of material fact exist. C. 20. In In re Adoption of we said “that parental unfitness is inherent in a finding by the court that any of [the] conditions [identified by the Legislature as grounds for termination] exist, and no separate showing or finding by the court with reference to unfitness is necessary.” 119 N.M. at 647, 894 P.2d at 1003. We conclude, based on our holding in that ease, that when the Department makes a prima facie showing of one or more bases of neglect, and the conditions are not ones that the Department can or reasonably could remedy, the Department has made a prima facie showing of inherent unfitness as a parent. Cf. In re C.P., 103 N.M. at 621, 711 P.2d at 898 (<HOLDING>). 21. The remaining question is whether the
holding that a district court is entitled to give more weight to the seriousness of the offense than to other factors recognizing same factors holding that while incarceration alone is not a sufficient basis for child support modification the foregoing factors should be considered in making the determination holding department had shown abandonment on the basis of factors other than incarceration holding that the question of guilty knowledge and especially intent to defraud may be shown by other than direct evidence