In In re J.W., 87 Ill.2d 56, 60-61, 57 Ill.Dec. 603, 429 N.E.2d 501 (1981), our supreme court determined that a juvenile court could hold an adjudicatory hearing without serving notice on the minor's father, whose identity and location were unknown and with whom the minor had never had any contact, because notice to the custodial mother was enough. In re J.W., 87 Ill. 2d at 58-62, 429 N.E.2d at 502-04. In support of its decision, our supreme court stated: "When someone not only does not share in the custody of the minor, but has so little contact with the minor that he does not learn of the minor's danger and cannot after diligent search be found, his interest is sufficiently slight that he should not be treated as an indispensable party; and the absence of such a comparative stranger does not deprive the minor of any substantial protection if the minor has the assistance of his custodian, the person on whom he relies for other important decisions in his life." In re J.W., 87 Ill. 2d at 61, 429 N.E.2d at 504. The court described respondent minor's father as "a stranger to the minor" and stated "the minor could not reasonably repose in him any special trust or confidence." In re J.W., 87 Ill. 2d at 58-59, 429 N.E.2d at 502. However, the supreme court noted the father would need to be provided notice by publication upon remand for further proceedings because respondent minor's mother had died. According to the court: "Additional proceedings must occur in the juvenile court, and the minor's mother is no longer there to stand with him. The minor's mother has died. He is no longer in her custody. Notice to and participation by her in the past is therefore no longer sufficient under section 4-4. In fact, the minor does not now appear to have any custodian or guardian. His father may be the only adult in the world from whom he can claim or hope for any loyalty or help whatsoever. Even a slight hope is better than nothing. Moreover, the court's disposition of the minor may be influenced by whether there is any adult willing to take responsibility for him, and the father may be the only candidate." In re J.W., 87 Ill. 2d at 62-63, 429 N.E.2d at 504. This language shows the importance our supreme court has placed on a minor having at least one person, besides an attorney or court-appointed guardian, present during juvenile proceedings whose only loyalty and concern would be toward the minor, even when the minor has little or no relationship with that individual .