Issues: Termination under § 19b(3)(c)(i); In re Powers Minors; In re Ellis; Whether the DHS made reasonable efforts to reunite the family; In re Moss; Best interests of the child; In re Olive/Metts Minors; In re White
Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished)
Case Name: In re Gossage
e-Journal Number: 57368
Judge(s): Per Curiam - Jansen, Murray, and Boonstra
The court held that the trial court properly terminated the respondent-mother's parental rights to the child where a statutory ground for termination existed and it was in the child's best interests. On appeal, the court rejected her argument that the DHS did not provide her with the help she needed. "The record shows that DHS made reasonable efforts to reunite respondent with the minor child by offering numerous appropriate services to address respondent's apparent drug addiction and parenting deficiencies." Further, she was given "ample time, more than average amount of time" to complete the services, and she failed to show that she took care of the issues that brought the child into care to begin with. The court also rejected her argument that termination was not in the child's best interests. "In finding that termination of respondent's parental rights was in the minor child's best interests, the court found that the minor child had not lived with respondent at all during his life, and therefore 'sees his foster parents as his parents for purposes of stability,' that he was 'doing wonderful [sic] in his relative placement and he is getting everything that he could possibly need or want,' and that '[h]e seems to be thriving and . . . growing up just fine,' suffering no lingering effects from the exposure to opiates that brought him into care when he was born." In addition, the record showed "that the court properly considered respondent's unsatisfactory compliance with her case service plan, her 'sporadic' visitation history with the minor child, and his well-being while in care." Affirmed.
© 2014 State Bar of Michigan