Order of reunification services to mother affirmed where there was sufficient evidence that services were in the minor’s best interest. Minor G.I. was removed from his mother due to her substance abuse. Because of mother’s long history of substance abuse and the failure to reunify with G.I.’s siblings, the Department recommended a bypass of reunification services. By the time of the disposition hearing, mother was involved in a drug treatment program. The trial court found that although it was clear that mother had a long history of substance abuse, and had her parental rights terminated to G.I.’s siblings, it was in G.I.’s best interest that mother receive services in this case. The court noted that father was receiving services, that mother had made serious efforts in her rehabilitation program, and that her recent interactions with the minor had been positive. Minor G.I. appealed the order, contending that the court abused its discretion when it determined that reunification was in his best interest. The appellate court affirmed the order, finding that there was sufficient evidence to support the finding that reunification was in the best interest of G.I. and that reunification was possible. Although there was evidence in the record supporting the opposite finding, it does not mean that the trial court abused its discretion here.