 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Family Independence Agency v. Smith1/29/2002
UNPUBLISHED
Respondent appeals as of right the termination of her parental rights to the minor child, Angel Smith (DOB 10/17/92), pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) [conditions that led to adjudication continue to exist and are not likely to be rectified within a reasonable time], (g) [parent, without regard to intent, fails to provide proper care or custody for the child], and (j) [reasonable likelihood of harm if returned to the parent]. We affirm.
On appeal respondent argues that not one of the statutory grounds for termination was met by clear and convincing evidence. We disagree.
A family court may not terminate a respondent's parental rights unless at least one of the statutory grounds for termination is established by clear and convincing evidence. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 360; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). This Court reviews the findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard. MCR 5.974(I); In re Ramsey, 229 Mich App 310, 314; 581 NW2d 291 (1998). Once a statutory basis for termination is established, the trial court shall terminate parental rights unless it finds that doing so is clearly not in the child's best interests. Trejo, supra at 344; see, also, MCL 712A.19b(5); MCR 5.974(F)(3). The trial court's ultimate decision regarding termination is reviewed in its entirety for clear error. Trejo, supra at 356-357.
The minor child was placed in foster care in March 1999, after respondent was arrested in connection with an investigation of the death of another child who had been in her care. At the pre-trial hearing, respondent admitted that she occasionally smoked crack cocaine and that the police found her apartment to be unfit for habitation, have little or no food, smell of a foul odor, and be roach infested. Thereafter, the minor child was made a temporary court ward. At the first dispositional hearing in April 1999, petitioner FIA submitted an initial service plan which included that respondent maintain a drug and alcohol free lifestyle, submit to weekly drug screens, attend an outpatient substance abuse program, attend parenting classes, undergo a psychological evaluation, and maintain suitable income, housing, and contact with the FIA worker and the minor child through supervised visitations on a consistent basis at the FIA agency. Respondent signed the parent-agency treatment plan agreement.
At the dispositional review hearing in July 1999, testimony included that respondent had a new residence, had not attended a substance abuse program, had no telephone, and no contact with the FIA worker. The court reminded respondent that she was required to call the FIA worker on a regular basis.
At the dispositional review hearing in September 1999, the FIA worker's testimony included that respondent had been attending parenting classes, maintained suitable housing, but "wasn't communicating with me." The FIA worker also agreed to permit respondent's relatives to attend meetings between her and respondent.
At the dispositional review hearing in December 1999, the FIA worker testified that respondent was receiving counseling but that she had not received documentation regarding the completion of parenting classes. She also had not received documentation indicating that respondent had any physical limitations, was not aware that respondent was receiving Social Security Income (SSI) for a disability, and had not been provided documentation of the same. The worker testified that weekly drug screens were not being completed because respondent claimed she could not take a bus to the necessary location. The court ordered respondent to provide the FIA worker with documentation regarding her receipt of SSI and that she submit to we
Page 1 2 3 Michigan Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|