In re White
303 Mich. App. 701 · Michigan Court of Appeals · 2014
Facts
Children’s Protective Services received multiple referrals concerning Rinnert’s care of her three daughters beginning in 2002. Rinnert’s oldest daughter is autistic, and the younger daughters have attention deficit and bipolar disorders; Rinnert is physically disabled. In 2011, the Department of Human Services petitioned for protective custody. Rinnert admitted her husband kicked the oldest daughter in 2010, living in 20+ places in 9 years, and making poor relationship decisions, including involvement with a sex offender, J. Harris. A psychological evaluation indicated Rinnert was emotionally immature and likely to seek exploitive relationships, posing a risk to her children. During the period children were in protective custody but before termination, Rinnert continued to invite men with questionable backgrounds into her home, including one met on Facebook who brought beer to a supervised visit, and B. Johnson, who had a criminal background and lived with her. The children also had recurring head lice after visiting Rinnert.
Procedural history
Respondent-appellant, L. Rinnert, appeals as of right the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights to her three minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j). The trial court also terminated the parental rights of the children’s father, J. White, who is not a party to this appeal.
Issue
Did the trial court err in finding clear and convincing evidence to terminate Rinnert's parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j)? Did the trial court err in finding that termination was in the children's best interests, including failing to consider individual best interests?
Holding
No, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order terminating Rinnert's parental rights. The court found no clear error in the trial court's findings regarding the statutory grounds for termination or the children's best interests.
Rule
Parental rights may be terminated if conditions leading to adjudication continue with no reasonable likelihood of rectification (MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i)). Termination is also warranted if a parent fails to provide proper care or custody with no reasonable expectation of improvement (MCL 712A.19b(3)(g)), or if there is a reasonable likelihood the child will be harmed if returned to the parent's home (MCL 712A.19b(3)(j)). A parent's failure to participate in and benefit from a service plan is evidence for these grounds. Additionally, termination must be in the children's best interests, considering factors like the child's bond, parent's ability, need for permanency, and advantages of foster care, while addressing individual children's needs if they significantly differ.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.