in Re Bryan Minors, 331963

This is an unpublished Michigan Court of Appeals decision affirming termination of respondent mother’s parental rights to CB and MB under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g), (j), and (k)(vi).
Respondent suffers from delusions, auditory hallucinations, and prescription-drug abuse, with a history of mental health issues affecting parenting.
On June 7, 2015, respondent submerged her children’s heads underwater in a pond; neighbor intervened and rescued them; respondent was charged but found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.
The termination hearing occurred after removal and placement with respondent’s brother; delays occurred but were largely attributable to respondent’s counsel and respondent’s circumstances.
Evidence showed the pond incident and ongoing trauma/complex trauma to the children, indicating a need for permanency and stability.
The trial court terminated parental rights at the initial dispositional hearing, and respondent appeals, challenging due process, sufficiency of grounds, and best interests.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Due process and trial delay	Respondent asserts delay denied effective counsel.	Respondent contributed to delays; she was incarcerated or mentally health-facility bound, reducing prejudice.	Delay did not violate due process; no reversal.
Sufficiency of statutory grounds	pond incident and mental health show grounds under (g), (j), (k)(vi).	Respondent argues injury was isolated; no intent to murder; focus on mental health.	Clear evidence supports termination under at least (g), (j), and (k)(vi).
Intent to murder	Court could infer intent from conduct of restraining arms and submerging heads.	Lacks intent due to medication issues and lack of intent to kill.	Court reasonably concluded attempted murder based on conduct; does not rely on insanity verdict to bar finding.
Best interests of the children	Terminating rights furthers safety, stability, and permanency given trauma and history.	Strong bond with children; potential trauma from termination.	Termination in children’s best interests; risk of return outweighs bond considerations.

In re VanDalen, 293 Mich App 139 (2009) (clear error standard; defer to trial court on credibility)
In re Moss, 301 Mich App 76 (2013) (preponderance standard for best interests; permanency guidance)
In re Olive/Metts, 297 Mich App 35 (2012) (child-focused best interests factors)
In re HRC, 286 Mich App 444 (2009) (defining clear error and credibility deference)
In re Utrera, 281 Mich App 1 (2008) (impact of delays and reasonable efforts)
People v Graham, 219 Mich App 707 (1996) (intent required for attempted murder; proof via circumstantial evidence)