In re Moss
301 Mich. App. 76
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Respondent's parental rights of her two youngest children were terminated based on statutory grounds (g) and (j) under MCL 712A.19b(3).
- Trial court relied on referee findings that there was clear and convincing evidence of grounds and that termination was in the children's best interests.
- Evidence showed respondent's substance abuse, including using drugs around children and taking them to purchase drugs, and instability such as homelessness.
- Respondent has a long history of mental illness with multiple hospitalizations and difficult medication management, including psychotic episodes.
- Respondent admitted past thoughts of harming her children and actions (attempted suffocation) while alleging treatment progress; the record showed previous custody regained only to encounter ongoing risk.
- Court noted that reunification efforts were not required because the petition requested termination and conditions satisfied MCR 3.977(E), making termination mandated or appropriate under the circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the grounds for termination were proven by clear and convincing evidence | Respondent argues grounds not proven | Petitioner contends grounds were proven | Grounds proven by clear and convincing evidence (g) and (j) |
| What standard governs the court's best-interests determination | Respondent argues for clear and convincing standard | Petitioner argues no explicit standard; preponderance applies | Best interests determined by preponderance of the evidence |
| Whether reunification services were required before termination | Respondent argues reunification should be offered | Petitioner asserts no reunification services needed under the petition and statute | No reunification services required; termination proper under MCR 3.977(E) and petition terms |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341 (2000) (establishes clear and convincing evidence standard for grounds for termination)
- In re BZ, 264 Mich App 286 (2004) (clarifies standard of review for termination findings)
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 US 745 (1982) (due-process considerations for termination proceedings; clear and convincing standard at fact-finding stage)
- Residential Ratepayer Consortium v Pub Serv Comm, 198 Mich App 144 (1993) (civil standard of proof in the absence of explicit statute; application in related settings)
- In re Franzel, 24 Mich App 371 (1970) (historical focus on child’s best interests in dispositions)