in Re gibson/sharp Minors, 334443

June 2014: DHHS removed older child after repeated domestic-violence incidents between respondent-mother and respondent-father; mother pleaded responsible and child was placed with DHHS.
Mother has bipolar disorder and cognitive limitations; services and counseling (focused on domestic violence and tailored to her abilities) were provided for ~2 years.
Despite participation in services, mother continued on-and-off contact and live-in relationships with father, engaged in ongoing domestic violence (including stabbing and assault incidents while pregnant), and violated a personal protection order.
DHHS changed permanency goal to adoption in May 2016 and petitioned to terminate parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j) (among others).
Trial court found mother generally complied with services but did not benefit sufficiently, domestic violence persisted, children were bonded to stable foster parents, and termination was in children’s best interests.
Court terminated both parents’ rights; mother appealed only the termination of her rights.

Issue	Mother's Argument	DHHS / Respondent-Father's Argument	Held
Whether statutory grounds for termination were proved (MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), (j))	Mother contends she complied with her service plan, so conditions leading to adjudication were remedied	DHHS: Mother participated but did not benefit; domestic violence and unstable housing continued, posing risk to children	Court held statutory grounds proved by clear and convincing evidence; termination affirmed
Whether mother benefitted from services sufficiently for reunification	Mother asserts compliance equals benefit and reunification was possible	DHHS and therapists: she understood but failed to apply lessons, continued contact with father, terminated joint counseling	Court found she did not benefit meaningfully despite services; no reasonable likelihood of rectification in a reasonable time
Whether children would be harmed if returned (MCL 712A.19b(3)(j))	Mother implied risk was mitigated by her participation in services	DHHS: Ongoing explosive domestic violence, weapons involved, risk to children is extreme	Court found reasonable likelihood of harm; (j) established
Whether termination was in children’s best interests	Mother argued court erred given her service compliance and bond	DHHS: Children were thriving, bonded to foster parents; need permanence outweighed parental bond	Court held termination served children’s best interests given stability, bonding to foster home, youth of children, and ongoing domestic violence

In re Mason, 486 Mich. 142 (2010) (standard of review: clear error for statutory-ground and ultimate determinations)
In re Trejo, 462 Mich. 341 (2000) (best-interest factors and concern about children languishing in temporary custody)
In re White, 303 Mich. App. 701 (2014) (failure to benefit from services supports findings under §19b(3) grounds)
In re Powers, 244 Mich. App. 111 (2001) (conditions leading to adjudication continue to exist despite services supports §19b(3)(c)(i))
In re Olive/Metts, 297 Mich. App. 35 (2012) (enumeration of best-interest factors)
In re VanDalen, 293 Mich. App. 120 (2011) (children’s young age and long foster care weigh against further reunification)
In re Martin, 450 Mich. 204 (1995) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
In re Frey, 297 Mich. App. 242 (2012) (parent must both comply with and benefit from service plan)