J.S.M. v. P.J.

I fully concur with the well-reasoned responses in the main opinion to the substantive arguments raised by the father.

The main opinion disposes of the father’s substantive “standing” and constitutional arguments by focusing on the fact that this is a dependency case. I write separately to note that I do not read the analysis of the main opinion in this regard to negatively imply that the father’s- arguments would necessarily yield a better result for him if this case were treated as a “mere” custody dispute. Alabama law clearly provides that a natural parent may lose his or her presumptive…