M was the mother of M.B., and S.B. Child Services removed both because M had been arrested on drug charges, and no suitable family members were available to care for the Children. After M was released from incarceration, the State petitioned for the involuntary termination of M's parental rights. M had not established suitable housing, had not maintained stable employment, and had not complied with court orders regarding treatment for her drug problem. M, advised by her counsel, decided to execute a 'Voluntary Relinquishment of Parental Rights.' The voluntary relinquishment of her parental rights and her consent to adoption were 'subject to the Court granting post-adoption privileges and the adoptive parents consenting to post-adoption contact. The Court had M reaffirm that she voluntarily decided to terminate her parental rights. The Court then asked the State if it is still in the children's best interest to continue with visitation. The case manager affirmed that it was. The court then accepted the visitation provision based on the best interests of the children. From that time until September 2007, M visited with the Children for two hours every two weeks. On September 10, 2007, a three-month review hearing was held. Neither M nor her counsel was notified of the hearing. The State recommended that M's visitation rights be terminated based on the best interests of the children. M appeared for her regularly scheduled visitation and was advised for the first time of the trial court's order terminating her visitation privileges. M filed a motion to set aside the trial court's initial order for voluntary termination. The Court denied the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed. M appealed.