With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of any other minor for whom the respondent is responsible.” 705 ILCS 405/2 — 18(3) (West 1998). We find respondent’s attempt to distinguish In re J.H. to be unpersuasive because relevant and admissible evidence under the above section is not limited to minors who are part of the same family unit or to contemporary instances of abuse. See In re Harpman, 146 Ill. App. 3d 504, 513-14, 496 N.E.2d 1242 (1986) (where evidence of respondent father’s sexual abuse of daughters by a prior marriage established two years earlier was found admissible in a dispositional hearing regarding wardship of children in current marriage despite fact that there was no direct evidence of sexual abuse of children in current marriage); see also In re Edricka C., 276 Ill. App. 3d 18, 30, 657 N.E.2d 78 (1995) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, section 2 — 22(1) of the Juvenile

A: holding in termination of fathers rights that evidence was sufficient to support finding children were removed for abuse or neglect when previous decree reflected trial court made findings that children were removed from mother under chapter 262 for abuse or neglect
B: holding evidence of past uncharged sexual encounters admissible in child sexual abuse case to show relationship between defendant and alleged victim
C: holding a woman may be prosecuted for child neglect and endangering a child for prenatal substance abuse
D: holding that past sibling abuse was admissible although it was by itself insufficient to show that abuse and neglect were imminent for child at issue
D.