The child was removed from the custody of an aunt and uncle after allegations that the aunt had physically abused him, and the juvenile court later entered a nonreunification order. The aunt and uncle appealed, arguing that the evidence did not support the conclusion that reunification would be detrimental. The Georgia Court of Appeals vacated the order because it did not separately state findings of fact, contained factual misstatements, and relied on legal grounds that were not supported by the dependency statutes. The court held that the juvenile court had to make particularized findings sufficient for meaningful appellate review and could not attribute stipulations to the aunt or uncle when the record did not show that they had made them. The court remanded for a new order addressing the evidence and the statutory framework governing reunification. A special concurrence agreed with the judgment but explained that some additional discussion in the majority opinion was not essential to resolving the appeal.