THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF
In The Court of Appeals
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Plaintiff, Respondent,
Jane and John Doe, Intervening parties,
Sabrina Nedrow, Chet Lambert, Kyle Hinton and Charlotte Vick, Defendants,
of whom, Sabrina Nedrow is Appellant.
In the Interest of: Nigel Nedrow (deceased) DOB: 07/23/00; Nina Nedrow DOB: 07/23/00; Savannah Nedrow DOB: 04/04/97, all Children Under the Age of 18.
Robert N. Jenkins, Sr., Family Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-642
Submitted December 1, 2005 – Filed December 21, 2005
Lawrence W. Crane, and Lisa Richardson Mobley, of Greenville, for Appellant.
Vanessa Lynn Hartman, of
Greenville, for Respondent.
Gwendolynn W. Barrett, of
Greenville, for Guardian Ad Litem.
PER CURIAM: This appeal arises from the removal hearing and the termination of parental rights (TPR) of Sabrina Nedrow. The court found her parental rights should be terminated on six grounds: 1) the child or another child in the home has been harmed, and because of the severity or repetition of the abuse or neglect, it is not reasonably likely that the home can be made safe within twelve months; 2) the parent has not remedied the conditions which caused the removal; 3) a willful failure to visit; 4) a willful failure to provide support; 5) the parent has a diagnosable condition unlikely to change within a reasonable time; and 6) the child has been in DSS’ custody for 15 of 22 months. Additionally, the court found termination was in the best interest of the child. See S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-1572 (Supp. 2004).
After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Ex Parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we affirm the family court’s ruling and grant counsel’s petition to be relieved.
 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 214, SCACR.