Subdivision (c)(1)(B)(i) of section 366.26 provides that if the juvenile court finds the child adoptable, "(c)(1) . . . the court shall terminate parental rights and order the child placed for adoption . . . unless . . . (B) the court finds a compelling reason for determining that termination would be detrimental to the child due to one or more of the following circumstances: (i) the parents have maintained regular visitation and contact with the child and the child would benefit from continuing the relationship." In In re Autumn H. (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 567, the court interpreted the beneficial relationship exception to mean "the relationship promotes the well-being of the child to such a degree as to outweigh the well-being the child would gain in a permanent home with new, adoptive parents. In other words, the court balances the strength and quality of the natural parent/child relationship in a tenuous placement against the security and the sense of belonging a new family would confer. If severing the natural parent/child relationship would deprive the child of a substantial, positive emotional attachment such that the child would be greatly harmed, the preference for adoption is overcome and the natural parent's rights are not terminated." (Id. at p. 575.) Factors which affect the parent/child relationship, such as the child's age, the portion of the child's life spent in the parent's custody, the effect of the interaction between the parent and child, and the child's particular needs, may be considered by the court in considering the applicability of the beneficial relationship exception. (Id. at pp. 575-576; accord, In re Zachary G. (1999) 77 Cal.App.4th 799, 811.) "The relationship must be such that the child would suffer detriment from its termination." (In re Angel B. (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 454, 467.) The appellate court interpreted "the 'benefit from continuing the parent/child relationship' exception to mean the relationship promotes the well-being of the child to such a degree as to outweigh the well-being the child would gain in a permanent home with new, adoptive parents." In determining whether the exception applies, "the juvenile court balances the strength and quality of the natural parent/child relationship in a tenuous placement against the security and the sense of belonging a new family would confer. If severing the natural parent/child relationship would deprive the child of a substantial, positive emotional attachment such that the child would be greatly harmed, the preference for adoption is overcome and the natural parent's rights are not terminated." (Ibid.; see also In re Cliffton B. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 415, 424-425 "Autumn H. teaches that the juvenile court must engage in a balancing test, juxtaposing the quality of the relationship and the detriment involved in terminating it against the potential benefit of an adoptive family.")