Ronald argues that the juvenile court's failure to give him the rights advisement during the termination phase of the proceedings violated his due process rights and that thus, the order terminating his parental rights should be vacated. In support of his argument, Ronald cites to In re Interest of Joelyann H., 6 Neb.App. 472, 574 N.W.2d 185 (1998), and In re Interest of A.D.S. and A.D.S., 2 Neb.App. 469, 511 N.W.2d 208 (1994). These cases are inapplicable to the present case.