NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER
APPEAL FROM THE FAMILY COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT (FC-S No. 09-12410).
Wilfred S. Tangonan for Mother-Appellant.
Mary Anne Magnier Tiffany K.M. Ige Deputy Attorneys General Department of the Attorney General State of Hawai'i for Petitioner-Appellee Department of Human Services.
Nakamura Chief Judge, Foley and Leonard, JJ.
SUMMARY DISPOSITION ORDER
Mother-Appellant (Mother) appeals from the Order Terminating Parental Rights, entered on May 14, 2012 by the Family Court of the First Circuit,  (Family Court) that terminated her parental and custodial rights over her children, MA and H, and awarded Petitioner-Appellee State of Hawai'i Department of Human Services (DHS) with permanent custody over MA and H.
On appeal, Mother contests the following findings of fact and conclusion of law and argues that:
1. Finding of Fact (FOF) 96 was erroneous in finding that DHS failed to provide every reasonable opportunity to succeed because the service plan failed to include a referral to a dual diagnosis treatment;
2. FOF 98 was erroneous in determining that Mother is not presently willing or able to provide a safe family home even with the assistance of a service plan, because Mother's current participation in the dual diagnosis treatment along with her trial testimony reflect her willingness to provide a safe family home and comply with services;
3. FOF 118 was erroneous in finding that DHS exerted reasonable and active efforts to reunify, where DHS failed to make a referral to a dual diagnosis treatment plan, which Mother entered on her own;
4. FOF 121 was erroneous in determining that each of the service plans were fair, appropriate, and comprehensive, because the service plans failed to include the dual diagnosis treatment plan; and
5. Conclusion of Law (COL) 3 was wrong in concluding that Mother is not presently able to provide the children with a safe home even with the assistance of a service plan, based on the foregoing erroneous findings.
Upon careful review of the record and the briefs submitted by the parties and having given due consideration to the arguments advanced and the issues raised, we resolve Mother's points of error as follows:
Mother's points of error all stem from her assertion just prior to trial that dual diagnosis treatment, which she contends was not offered or ...