Courts must “recognize that the child’s best interest is paramount throughout the proceedings. Thus, the district court need not place children in a legal holding pattern, while waiting for the parent to resolve the issues that caused their children to be deemed neglected or abused.” State ex rel. Children, Youth & Families Dep’t v. Maria C., 2004-NMCA-083, ¶ 53, 136 N.M. 53, 94 P.3d 796 (citation omitted). Given these policy concerns, it would be illogical to read the statute in a way that would allow parents to abuse a child so long as there are no witnesses, the child is too young to provide evidence, and neither parent admits to the abuse or provides evidence against the other parent. See Hess Corp. v. N.M. Taxation & Revenue Dep't, 2011-NMCA-043, ¶ 12, 149 N.M. 527, 252 P.3d 751 (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 2011-NMCERT-003, 150 N.M. 619,
holding that statutes are to be interpreted in accordance with the legislative intent and in a manner that will not render the statutes application absurd unreasonable or unjust internal quotation marks and citation omitted holding statutes are not applied retroactively absent clear legislative intent holding that a statute cannot be construed in a manner that would lead to an absurd or unreasonable result recognizing that the cardinal rule in statutory construction is to give effect to the intent of the legislature and to avoid construing a statute in a manner that produces an absurd unjust or unreasonable result holding rules of procedure interpreted in same manner as statutes