Pablo S., a six-year-old, broke his femur while playing on a scooter. For almost two months, while the boy could not walk but pulled himself around with his arms or hopped on one foot and the leg visibly deformed, the parents failed to seek medical treatment even though the boy cried in pain and was covered by medical insurance. The parents tried home remedies and punished the boy when he complained or refused to walk on the leg. The child’s grandmother eventually arranged surreptitiously to transport the boy to the hospital while the parents were at work. The child faced corrective surgery and physical rehabilitation. The boy and his sister were removed from the parents and detained. Although the parents embraced psychological counseling after the boy and his sister were detained and there was no record of prior abuse of either minor, the trial court denied reunification services under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.5, subdivision (b)(6), infliction of severe physical harm through omission. The parents filed a writ petition arguing that the trial court failed to make a finding under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.5, subdivision (c) that the parents’ behavior was unlikely to be changed by services. The Court of Appeal denied the writ, finding that the record supported the trial court denial of reunification services and further that the court was not required to consider the effect of providing reunification services because those paragraphs of section 361.5, subdivision (c) requiring such a finding do not apply where reunification services are denied under subdivision (b)(6).