Najam, J.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
T.B. (“Mother”) appeals the involuntary termination of her parental rights to her children and asks this court to adopt a policy that prohibits the involuntary termination of parental rights for all mentally retarded parents. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
….
For all these reasons, we decline Mother’s invitation to depart from the clear and unambiguous language of Indiana’s termination statute in order to judicially legislate an exception whereby mentally handicapped parents are immune from involuntary termination proceedings. Moreover, because the trial court’s unchallenged findings clearly and convincingly support its ultimate decision to terminate Mother’s parental rights to N.B. and M.B., we find no error. See McBride, 798 N.E.2d 185, 198-199 (Ind. 2003) (stating that a judgment is clearly erroneous only when it is unsupported by the findings and conclusions entered on those findings); see also In re E.S., 762 N.E.2d 1287, 1290 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (concluding that when evidence shows emotional and physical development of child in need of services is threatened, termination of parent-child relationship is appropriate).
Affirmed.
RILEY, J., and DARDEN, J., concur.