Juvenile contends the order is appealable and in support notes that this Court recently reviewed a family court order denying a petition to terminate the parental rights of one parent. In re N.L., 2019 VT 10, ––– Vt. ––––, 207 A.3d 475. In In re N.L., this Court reversed the trial court's denial of the termination petition as to father because the findings did not support the conclusions of the court.

But children, like their parents, have a strong statutorily and constitutionally protected interest in relationships with the parents with whom they have established bonds. See In re N.L. , 2019 VT 10, ¶ 39, 209 Vt. ––––, 207 A.3d 475 (Robinson, J., dissenting) (noting "substantial and permanent consequences of a termination of parental rights, with profound implications for the constitutional rights and most intimate personal experiences of both parent and child"); see also Santosky, 455 U.S. at 760, 102 S.Ct. 1388 ("At the factfinding, the State cannot presume that a child and his parents are adversaries.... [U]ntil the State proves parental unfitness, the child and his parents share a vital interest in preventing erroneous termination of their ... relationship."); In re D.C., 2012 VT 108, ¶ 27, 193 Vt. 101, 71 A.3d 1191 (agreeing with general principle described in Santosky ).