in Re a a Cole Minor
335518
| Mich. Ct. App. | Jun 13, 2017Background
- Respondent-mother has a long history of drug abuse and multiple incarcerations, with AAC born addicted and placed in foster care at birth.
- CPS substantiated a claim against respondent for drug use in 2005, leading to years of services and a guardianship arrangement for TC in 2008.
- Respondent was imprisoned for unarmed robbery, later discovered pregnancy, used opiates, and AAC was placed in nonrelative foster care after birth.
- Respondent was incarcerated for 18 months to 30 years; earliest release date cited as June 20, 2017, with ongoing incarceration at the time of termination.
- During incarceration, respondent engaged in parenting classes and substance-abuse treatment, but concerns remained about relapse risk and suitable housing/work after release.
- Caseworkers concluded respondent would need at least about a year of real-world sobriety and stability (housing/employment) before proper care could be provided; plans to live with her mother were deemed unsuitable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination under factor (c)(i) is supported | DHHS argues conditions persist and no reasonable time to rectify. | Respondent argues other grounds should not rely on future risk; focus on individual capacity. | Supported under (c)(i). |
| Whether termination under factor (g) is supported | DHHS contends respondent cannot provide proper care or custody within a reasonable time. | Respondent contends she could regain ability to parent with release and services. | Supported under (g). |
| Whether termination was in AAC's best interests | DHHS asserts no bond with respondent; permanence and stability advocate for termination. | Respondent argues continued parental rights serve AAC's interests, given potential for reunification. | Termination in AAC's best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2000) (clear-error standard for termination findings; burden on petitioner)
- In re Rood, 483 Mich 73 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2009) (clear-error review of termination facts)
- In re Moss, 301 Mich App 76 (Michigan Appellate Court, 2013) (best-interests factor analysis and standard of review)
- In re Olive/Metts, 297 Mich App 35 (Michigan Appellate Court, 2012) (best-interests framework and permanency considerations)
- In re White, 303 Mich App 701 (Michigan Appellate Court, 2014) (considerations for child well-being while in care)
- In re Schadler, 315 Mich App 406 (Michigan Appellate Court, 2016) (focus on child-centric best-interests assessment)