In the Interest of C.J.V., 323 Ga.App. at 285, 746 S.E.2d 783 (punctuation omitted); see also In the Interest of D.L.T.C., 299 Ga.App. 765, 769(1), 684 S.E.2d 29 (2009).In the Interest of C.J.V., 323 Ga.App. at 285, 746 S.E.2d 783 (punctuation omitted); see also In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 145(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012) ; In the Interest of T.Z.L., 325 Ga.App. at 94(1)(a), 751 S.E.2d 854 ; In the Interest of D.L.T.C., 299 Ga.App. at 769(1), 684 S.E.2d 29.See In the Interest of C.J.V., 323 Ga.App. at 286–87, 746 S.E.2d 783 (explaining that evidence that a mother is “unemployed, without prospects for future employment, and without any stable living arrangements” is an insufficient basis to terminate her parental rights) (punctuation omitted); id. at 291, 746 S.E.2d 783 (Dillard, J., concurring specially and fully) (“The State has no right to irrevocably sever the natural parent-child relationship simply because a parent is incapable of providing her children with an idyllic middle-class lifestyle.”); see also In the Interest of C.T., 286 Ga.App. 186, 190(2), 648 S.E.2d 708 (2007).

” (Citations, punctuation and footnote omitted; emphasis supplied.) In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 148(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012) (insufficient evidence that cause of deprivation likely to continue where although father did not at all times act in an exemplary manner, case did not only consist of positive promises and father's effort to maintain a bond with his child was consistent throughout); see also In the Interest of R.C.M., 284 Ga.App. 791, 799–800(III)(3), 645 S.E.2d 363 (2007) (where father never abused or neglected children, children became deprived when he was arrested, case plan included goals father could not achieve while incarcerated, and petition to terminate was filed while father was still incarcerated before he had a real opportunity to complete case plan goals, juvenile court's findings that cause of deprivation likely to continue was not supported by clear and convincing evidence); In the Interest of K.J., 226 Ga.App. 303, 307–308(2)(b), 486 S.E.2d 899 (1997) (father and child had positive relationship to the extent permitted by father's incarceration and no evidence

“Without belaboring the point here, we will assume that the evidence was sufficient to show that the [child was] deprived and that the mother and ... father were responsible for that deprivation at the time the [child was] placed in the custody of DFCS [and at the time of the termination hearing].” In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 145(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012).We observe that the father did not appeal the order finding deprivation, so the father is bound “to the finding that at the time of the order the child was deprived for the reasons given in the order.”

“On appeal from a juvenile court's decision to terminate parental rights, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the court's decision and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the parental rights should be terminated.” (Citation and punctuation omitted.) In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 139, 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012). “We do not weigh the evidence or resolve credibility issues, but merely determine whether a rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the natural parent's right to custody should be terminated.” (Citation and footnote omitted.)

We find that there was insufficient clear and convincing evidence to support a conclusion that the mother failed, without justifiable cause, to maintain a parental bond with D.P. As a result, the trial court was not authorized to terminate the mother's parental rights on this basis. See In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 146(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012) (The juvenile court erred in concluding that the father had failed to maintain a bond with his children when every witness who testified concerning the appellant's relationship with his children showed that he had maintained regular, scheduled visitation with his children and that, except for some indication he needed to be more of a father figure to his children instead of a friend, all of his interactions with his children were positive and appropriate.); In the Interest of M.T.F., 318 Ga.App. 135, 146–147(1)(a), 733 S.E.2d 432 (2012) (The juvenile court erred in concluding that the mother failed to develop and maintain a parental bond with her child before the filing of the termination petition.

Although a parent's obligation to support her child exists, even in the absence of an order directing support, we do not believe that this failure was sufficient to support a finding that the deprivation was likely to continue in light of the mother's other progress on her case plan. See In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 147(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012). The testimony demonstrated that the mother brought presents and food when she had her weekly visits with D.J., and nothing in the record indicates that she might not be able to contribute at least a de minimis monetary amount toward her child's support in the future.

On appeal from a juvenile court’s decision to terminate parental rights, this Court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the court’s ruling and determines whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the parent’s rights should be terminated. In the Interest of C. S. , 319 Ga. App. 138, 139, 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012). Further, "[i]n the appellate review of a bench trial, ... due deference must be given to the trial court, [inasmuch as] it has the opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses."

In the Interest of D. M., 339 Ga. App. at 52 ; accord In the Interest of C. J. K., 323 Ga. App. at 285 ; In the Interest of C. S., 319 Ga. App. 138 , 145 (1) (735 SE2d 140 ) (2012). 16

In the Interest of J.D.F., 277 Ga.App. 424, 427(1), 626 S.E.2d 616 (2006) (citation and punctuation omitted).In the Interest of C.S., 319 Ga.App. 138, 145(1), 735 S.E.2d 140 (2012).In the Interest of K.M., 240 Ga.App. 677, 680, 523 S.E.2d 640 (1999) (citation omitted; emphasis supplied).

On appeal from a juvenile court's decision to terminate parental rights, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the juvenile court's ruling and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found by clear and convincing evidence that the parent's rights should be terminated. In the Interest of C. S., 319 Ga. App. 138, 139 (735 SE2d 140) (2015). Nonetheless,