aggravated circumstances] determination and to require [the Department] to both put in place a treatment plan and [to] offer the parent assistance in working that plan.” In Mother’s view, delaying an aggravated circumstances finding during the pendency of an appeal from the ear ed to use drugs throughout the pendency of this case, and she remained unemployed and without a home. Additionally, the district court may not terminate parental rights to a child absent a finding “that the conditions and causes ofthe neglect and abuse are unlikely to change in the foreseeable future}.]” Section 32A-4-28(B)(2). This finding is required regardless of aggravated circumstances. Amy B., 2003-NMCA-017, ¶ 18. And it must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. See Mafin M., 2003-NMSC-015, ¶ 25 (<HOLDING>). Thus, the risk of an erroneous deprivation
recognizing that the department is required to present clear and convincing evidence to support termination of a parents parental rights holding that foster parents have standing to intervene to seek termination of parental rights holding that due process allows parental rights to be terminated only upon clear and convincing evidence of unfitness holding that the clear and convincing standard provides appropriate due process in cases involving parental rights holding that a trial courts determination that clear and convincing evidence supports the termination of parental rights will not be overturned unless found to be clearly erroneous or lacking in evidentiary support