In Re S L Jordan Minor, 20220310

Background

Mother previously had parental rights to half‑siblings LCM and ASM terminated after LCM was sexually abused; the trial court and this Court had concluded mother failed to protect them.
After SLJ’s birth petitioner filed for permanent custody; SLJ was placed with his paternal grandmother (relative foster care) and petitioner sought termination of both parents’ rights.
The trial court took judicial notice of the prior termination file and this Court’s unpublished opinion in In re Massey/McIntyre, and held relitigation of the sibling‑abuse findings barred by res judicata.
Evidence showed mother and father continued to cohabit or maintain a romantic relationship despite the prior abuse finding, and both had poor attendance at scheduled visits with SLJ.
The trial court found statutory grounds to terminate mother under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (g), (i), and (j), and father under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i), (g), (j), (k)(ii), and (k)(ix), and concluded termination was in SLJ’s best interests.
This Court affirmed all termination grounds except (g) for both parents (trial court erred as to (g) because it made no findings on financial ability), and affirmed the best‑interests determination.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether mother’s rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii) (failed to protect from sibling sexual abuse)	Prior record established sibling LCM was sexually abused; mother knew and kept father in the home, creating foreseeable risk to SLJ	Mother argued changed circumstances (e.g., relationship ended, planning to move) and contested sufficiency	Affirmed: prior findings and mother’s continued association with father supported (b)(ii)
Whether rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) (financial ability to provide)	Parents failed to provide proper care though financially able	Parents presented evidence of baby supplies and argued they could provide; court made no factual finding on financial ability	Reversed on this ground: trial court made no findings on financial ability; error harmless because other grounds established
Whether mother’s rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(i) (prior termination for sibling and failure to rectify)	Mother’s rights to LCM were previously terminated for failure to protect; she did not rectify conditions (continued contact with father)	Mother claimed plans to move and end relationship	Affirmed: mother failed to rectify conditions that led to prior termination
Whether father’s rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i) (parent’s act caused sibling sexual abuse)	Prior adjudication found father sexually abused LCM; no evidence he received treatment; risk to SLJ foreseeable	Father disputed but did not successfully challenge prior adjudication	Affirmed: res judicata and prior findings supported (b)(i)
Whether father’s rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(k)(ii) and (k)(ix) (criminal sexual conduct/sexual abuse)	Prior record showed attempted penetration and sexual contact with LCM satisfying statutory definitions	Father argued insufficient reconsideration of prior findings	Affirmed: prior evidence met statutory definitions for (k)(ii) and (k)(ix)
Whether rights could be terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(j) (reasonable likelihood child harmed if returned)	Parents’ conduct/capacity (living with the abuser, lack of treatment, infrequent visits) created reasonable likelihood of harm	Parents highlighted bonding and claims of changed circumstances	Affirmed: parents’ conduct and visitation history supported (j) for both
Whether termination was in SLJ’s best interests under MCL 712A.19b(5)	SLJ’s safety, need for permanency and stability, and placement with a relative willing to adopt favored termination	Parents cited bond and some parenting capacity	Affirmed: court found termination served SLJ’s need for safety, permanency, and stability

Key Cases Cited

In re Moss, 301 Mich. App. 76 (standards for statutory‑grounds proof and clear‑error review)
In re LaFrance Minors, 306 Mich. App. 713 (a parent’s treatment of one child is probative of treatment of others)
In re Martin, 316 Mich. App. 73 (only one statutory ground required to terminate)
In re Hudson, 294 Mich. App. 261 (harm under § 19b(3)(j) may be physical or emotional)
In re Olive/Metts Minors, 297 Mich. App. 35 (best‑interests factors, including relative placement)
In re White, 303 Mich. App. 701 (best‑interests considerations such as visitation and compliance)
In re Payne/Pumphrey/Fortson, 311 Mich. App. 49 (time in care, likelihood of reunification, and case‑plan compliance as best‑interest factors)
In re Jenks, 281 Mich. App. 514 (statutory language encompasses half‑sibling sexual abuse)