Termination under §§ 19b(3)(b)(i) & (ii); In re Sours; Principle that only one statutory ground must be met; In re Hudson; In re HRC; Best interests of the child; MCL 719A.19b(5); In re VanDalen; In re Kaczkowski; In re White; In re Olive/Metts Minors

Holding that at least one statutory ground was met, and that termination was in the child’s best interests, the court affirmed termination of respondent-father’s parental rights. His parental rights were terminated primarily on the basis of abuse and abandonment. On appeal, the court rejected his argument that the DHHS failed to prove a statutory ground for termination. It noted that the child’s “testimony supported a finding that [he] injured and abused her, and [the case manager’s] testimony provided clear and convincing evidence that [the child] was reasonably likely to experience similar physical abuse if returned to” his care. In addition, the child’s testimony about her father’s girlfriend’s abuse supported the trial court’s determination that he “failed to protect her from physical abuse.” The court also rejected his claim that termination was not in the child’s best interests, finding the evidence supported the trial court’s best-interests findings, as well as its findings that respondent “had a history of domestic abuse with his girlfriend, that [he] failed to adequately comply with services or a treatment plan, and that [the child’s] well-being improved while she was in foster care.”