In re TK
306 Mich. App. 698
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- TK, then 14, thrived in a foster home after guardianship proceedings began; guardianship was sought as permanent placement in 2013 after reunification was deemed unlikely
- Sturm sexually abused TK for years; TK diagnosed with PTSD, leading to petition to exercise jurisdiction and later termination proceedings for Sturm
- Respondent mother’s other five children were removed in 2011 due to safety concerns; TK uniquely placed with a guardian in a foster home
- Guardianship under MCL 712A.19a(7)(c) was chosen over termination to preserve a potential parent-child relationship and to provide TK with stability
- The trial court upheld the guardianship as consistent with TK’s best interests; respondent appealed challenging due process and the permanency plan decision
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Guardianship violates due process as de facto termination | Sturm’s abuse and ongoing risk justify guardianship | Guardianship is not termination; safeguards exist | Guardianship is not de facto termination; due process satisfied |
| Guardian appointment proper given best interests and feasibility of reunification | Long-term guardianship was necessary | Guardianship should be reconsidered for reunification or long-term foster care | Court did not abuse discretion; guardianship appropriate given TK’s wishes and stability in guardian’s home |
| Procedural due process safeguards satisfied | Notice, opportunity to be heard, and review rights were insufficient | Statutory procedures and annual reviews ensure fairness | Procedural due process satisfied; safeguards in MCL 712A.19a and related rules adequate |
| Reasonable efforts toward reunification met; contact with respondent appropriate | Respondent made progress; more efforts required | Respondent failed to internalize services; visitation restricted for TK’s welfare | Court wouldn’t redefine reasonable efforts; visitation limitations appropriate to TK’s recovery |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Rood, 483 Mich 73 (2009) (due process standards in child protective proceedings)
- In re Mason, 486 Mich 142 (2010) (guardianship viewed as alternative to termination)
- In re Olive/Metts Minors, 297 Mich App 35 (2012) (individualized assessment required; not all siblings treated the same)
- In re COH, 495 Mich 184 (2014) (abuse of discretion standard for guardian appointment)