In re LaFrance Minors
306 Mich. App. 713
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Consolidated case where four children are in question; petition sought jurisdiction over four children based on youngest child’s medical neglect incident; two parents had a 10-year nonmarital relationship; removal occurred after youngest child’s severe dehydration and acute kidney injury with subdural hematomas initially suspected of abuse.
- Youngest child born July 2011 with prenatal drug exposure (methadone/THC); CPS opened a case three days after birth; hospital staff raised concerns about mother’s care, leading to emergency removal of all four children on November 17, 2011.
- Older three children (ages 3, 5, 10) had no prior allegations of abuse or neglect; they were described as bonded to parents and thriving in respective placements.
- Respondent-father admitted fault for not recognizing the dehydration and delaying medical care; respondent-mother had ongoing drug issues and failed to participate in many services for the youngest child’s cerebral palsy.
- Trial court adjudicated jurisdiction over all four children on the single ground of failure to provide care; termination petitions were filed May 22, 2013; court found grounds present and terminated parental rights except remanding for best-interests review on youngest child.
- The Court of Appeals remanded for redetermination of the youngest child’s best interests and reversed as to the three older children due to errors regarding anticipatory neglect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether medical neglect qualifies as a basis under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii). | Petitioner. | Respondents. | No; subparagraph (ii) requires a parent's act, not mere omission. |
| Whether termination was justified for the youngest child under (3)(c)(i), (3)(g), and (3)(j). | Petitioner. | Respondents. | Yes for the youngest child; grounds proven and termination in best interests. |
| Whether anticipatory neglect supported termination for the three older children. | Petitioner relied on anticipatory neglect. | Respondents had no prior abuse/neglect of older children. | Erroneous to apply anticipatory neglect to the older three children. |
| Remand and best-interests determination for the youngest child only. | Remand to reassess best interests. | Proceed with termination findings. | Remanded for redetermination of youngest child’s best interests; affirm other parts. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341 (2000) (review of best interests and termination standards; de novo statutory interpretation noted)
- In re Hulbert, 186 Mich App 600 (1990) (necessity of showing actual failure and inability to provide proper care)
- Santosky v Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982) (parents’ liberty interests; substantial protections in termination proceedings)
- Troxel v Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental liberty interest context in custody decisions)
- In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624 (1999) (application of grounds for termination in abuse/neglect contexts)
- In re Ellis, 294 Mich App 30 (2011) (examples of how abuse/neglect findings relate to termination)
- In re HRC, 286 Mich App 444 (2009) (abuse/neglect considerations in termination)
- In re Archer, 277 Mich App 71 (2007) (excessive punishment concerns in termination)