To establish a benefit to continuing parental relationship exception a parent must prove that the benefit outweighs the child’s interest in the stability and permanence of adoption. Mother appealed the order terminating her parental rights to the minor, contending that the trial court erred in rejecting her argument pursuant to section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(B)(1) that the minor would benefit sufficiently from continuing his relationship with her. Mother argued that the trial court improperly required her to prove a “compelling” reason why termination of her parental rights would be detrimental to the minor. Mother contended that establishing the circumstances identified in the statute alone is sufficient to preclude termination of parental rights even when no compelling reason to continue those rights is shown. The appellate court rejected mother’s argument and affirmed the orders. The plain language of section 366.26, as well as the purpose and the history of the statute and prior case law all contradict mother’s statutory interpretation. A parent must do more to establish the parental relationship exception than just show the existence of some benefit to continuing the relationship.