In In re Randi D. (1989) 209 Cal. App. 3d 624, the mother's (Sharon's) new husband Roger filed a Civil Code section 232 action against her children's father because he (Roger) wished to adopt the children. The trial court granted the petition, and the father appealed. While the appeal was pending, Sharon and Roger were divorced, and Roger's stepparent adoption petitions were dismissed. The appellate court took notice of these postjudgment developments in consideration of the father's request to set aside the judgment (of abandonment). The father based his request, just as David does in the present case, on a claim the purpose of a custody and control proceeding is to facilitate the affected child's adoption. ( Id. at p. 627.) The appellate court rejected this contention. "The case before us is very different from that considered by the court in Elise K. Here the minors have been and remain in the custody of Sharon, their natural mother, since the parents' separation in 1979. It is true that Civil Code section 232 proceedings were commenced by Roger when the father refused to consent to Roger's proposed stepparent adoption of minors. But the stepparent adoption proceeding is entirely separate from the Civil Code section 232 proceeding, and failure of the adoption does not take away the factual basis for the decision to terminate the father's parental rights. "Civil Code section 232, subdivision (a)(1) see now Fam. Code, 7820, 7822, subd. (a) specifically provides in part: '(a) An action may be brought for the purpose of having any child under the age of 18 years declared free from the custody and control of either or both of his or her parents when the child comes within any of the following descriptions: (1) The child has been left ... by one parent in the care and custody of the other parent for a period of one year without any provision for the child's support, or without communication from the parent ... with the intent on the part of the parent ... to abandon the child.' The code section clearly contemplates severance of the parental right in such a situation without reference to whether or not adoption proceedings are pending. "Ultimately, the court in deciding a petition under Civil Code section 232 must determine whether it would be detrimental to minors to continue the parental relationship. Here we conclude that the trial court did so and the judgment should be affirmed even in light of the subsequent events." (In re Randi D., supra, 209 Cal. App. 3d at p. 628.)