in Re T Boone Minor
338844
Mich. Ct. App.Dec 14, 2017Background
- Child removed after respondent (mother) drove under the influence with the child aboard and admitted recent cocaine, marijuana, and heroin use; later petitions included shoplifting while child was present and significant mental-health and substance-abuse concerns.
- Court took custody in Dec 2015; respondent pled to allegations; child placed with foster family and remained there ~1.5 years.
- DHHS provided services: psychological evaluation, substance-abuse assessment, biweekly outpatient counseling, drug screens, parenting programs, housing/employment referrals; respondent largely failed to participate or complete services.
- Respondent missed about 40 parenting visits, had intermittent positive drug screens, refused recommended inpatient treatment, had unstable housing and unemployment, and faced pending criminal charges/jail at termination.
- DHHS petitioned to terminate parental rights in April 2017; trial court terminated under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (c)(ii), and (g) and found termination was in the child’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DHHS) | Defendant's Argument (Respondent) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds for termination under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) (conditions leading to adjudication continue) existed | Conditions (substance abuse, criminality, mental health) persisted despite services | DHHS failed to provide adequate/reasonable services (esp. intensive mental-health treatment); with more services respondent could reunify | Court: Held statutory grounds proven by clear and convincing evidence; respondent failed to rectify conditions and made little progress |
| Whether statutory grounds under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(ii) (other conditions likely to cause continued neglect) existed | Additional conditions (employment, parenting, housing) remained unresolved | Respondent argued services inadequate to address these issues | Court: Held conditions persisted and were unlikely to be rectified in a reasonable time |
| Whether statutory ground under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) (failure to provide proper care and custody and no reasonable expectation of remedy) existed | Respondent failed to provide care/custody and had no reasonable prospect of improvement | Respondent claimed ability to parent and bond with child; heritage/culture argument | Court: Held respondent unable to provide proper care; no reasonable expectation of improvement |
| Whether termination was in the child’s best interests | Stable foster home with strong bond, willingness to adopt, child’s need for permanency outweighs respondent’s fading bond and lack of progress | Respondent argued existing bond and cultural/heritage considerations made her placement preferable | Court: Held termination was in child’s best interests given fading bond, stability with foster family, and low likelihood respondent could attain permanence soon |
Key Cases Cited
- In re VanDalen, 293 Mich. App. 120 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011) (clear-and-convincing standard and review for clear error on statutory grounds)
- In re White, 303 Mich. App. 701 (Mich. Ct. App. 2014) (continued conditions and failure to rectify support termination)
- In re Fried, 266 Mich. App. 535 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005) (reasonableness review of reunification efforts)
- In re BZ, 264 Mich. App. 286 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004) (definition of clear error)
- In re LE, 278 Mich. App. 1 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008) (DHHS duty to make reasonable reunification efforts)
- In re Mason, 486 Mich. 142 (Mich. 2010) (termination may be premature absent reasonable efforts)
- In re Frey, 297 Mich. App. 242 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012) (parent’s duty to participate in offered services)
- In re Moss, 301 Mich. App. 76 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013) (best-interest standard requires preponderance of evidence)
- In re Olive/Metts, 297 Mich. App. 35 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012) (appellate review of best-interest finding for clear error)