However, "a finding under any of the provisions in section 7B-1111 will result in a parent 'forfeit[ing] his or her constitutionally protected status.'" In re A.C.V., 203 N.C.App. 473, 481, 692 S.E.2d 158, 164 (2010) (quoting Owenby v. Young, 357 N.C. 142, 145, 579 S.E.2d 264, 267 (2003)). As respondent does not challenge the trial court's adjudication of grounds, her argument is without merit. See In re K.N.K., 374 N.C. 50, 60, 839 S.E.2d 735, 742 (2020) (following an adjudication of grounds to terminate a parent's rights, "the trial court was obliged by N.C. G.S. § 7B-1110(a) to determine whether it was in [the child's] best interests to terminate respondent's parental rights, and to do so without regard to any competing interest of respondent.")

Without proper findings in the 19 March 2010 order, the trial court's past adjudication of neglect alone was not sufficient to support the application of the best interest test in removing P.W. from the "care, custody and control" of Respondent-Mother. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's order and remand for reconsideration. See also David, 359 N.C. at 307, 608 S.E.2d at 754 (discussing the application of the Petersen presumption to a custody dispute and remanding for the trial court to make proper findings of fact "supported by clear and convincing evidence") (citations omitted); see also In re A.C.V., ___ N.C. App. ___, 692 S.E.2d 158 (2010). II.