in Re a L Henderson Minor
336561
| Mich. Ct. App. | Nov 14, 2017Background
- Child AL was removed from respondent mother’s care after March 2015 hospitalizations for paranoid and manic behavior; AL was placed with maternal grandparents.
- Respondent has multiple mental-health diagnoses in the record (bipolar disorder with mania/psychosis, PTSD, paranoia, schizophrenia); respondent’s experts emphasized PTSD as primary but did not fully rule out bipolar disorder.
- DHHS created a case service plan requiring counseling, psychiatric care, medication compliance, and other reunification services (Families First, bonding assessment, supervised visitation).
- Respondent received inpatient and outpatient psychiatric treatment and multiple hospitalizations; periods of compliance with medication correlated with stabilization and temporary return of AL in July 2015.
- Respondent intermittently stopped taking medications, behaved erratically, threatened participants, discontinued services in Feb 2016, and ceased visiting AL; petitioner sought termination after more than 182 days post-disposition.
- After a bench trial, the trial court terminated respondent’s parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j); the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Petitioner’s Argument | Respondent’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHHS provided reasonable reunification services and reasonable ADA accommodations for respondent’s disability | DHHS provided extensive mental-health services tailored to respondent’s symptoms; services were reasonable and offered by professionals | Respondent: DHHS misdiagnosed her (treated bipolar/psychosis) and failed to accommodate PTSD specifically under the ADA; services were inadequate | Held: No clear error — DHHS offered reasonable services addressing respondent’s multiple diagnoses; PTSD was one of several conditions and treatments overlapped; respondent failed to cooperate |
| Whether statutory grounds for termination under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) were proved | Conditions (mental illness) leading to adjudication continued and were unlikely to be rectified in reasonable time given respondent’s noncompliance | Respondent: With correct PTSD-focused treatment she could parent within six months; termination premature | Held: Clear-and-convincing proof satisfied; condition persisted and no reasonable likelihood of rectification within a time appropriate for child’s age |
| Whether statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) (failure to provide proper care) was proved | Respondent failed to provide proper care and unlikely to do so within a reasonable time due to ongoing mental-health issues and noncompliance | Respondent: Caring parent who needs more time and proper treatment focused on PTSD | Held: Evidence supports termination — failure to provide proper care and no reasonable expectation of improvement in time needed |
| Whether statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3)(j) (risk of harm if returned) was proved | Respondent’s erratic/paranoid behavior and noncompliance create a reasonable likelihood of harm to AL if returned | Respondent: Future correct treatment would mitigate risk | Held: Court did not clearly err — record shows likely harm if child returned given respondent’s conduct and lack of sustained progress |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Fried, 266 Mich App 535 (discussing trial-court credibility and review for clear error)
- In re JK, 468 Mich 202 (clear-and-convincing burden for statutory termination grounds)
- In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14 (DHHS duty to make reasonable ADA accommodations; parent must show ability to meet children’s basic needs)
- In re Frey, 297 Mich App 242 (parental duty to participate in offered services)
- In re Miller, 433 Mich 331 (trial court’s superiority to judge witness credibility)
- In re White, 303 Mich App 701 (standards for finding no reasonable expectation of improvement and harm to child)