Background
DHHS petitioned for jurisdiction over CP and immediate termination of the mother’s parental rights two days after CP’s birth. The mother reported that she lacked independent housing and income, and her Hope Project transitional housing did not permit children. She had previously sexually abused CP’s older sibling, MP, in 2017, was convicted, registered under Michigan’s sex-offender law, and voluntarily released her rights to MP.
The mother presented evidence that she had been trafficked and coerced into the 2017 abuse, while acknowledging her responsibility for harming MP. Since her release from prison, she had engaged in therapy, recovery and parenting programs, maintained employment and sobriety, developed a support network, and had supervised contact with MP with the adoptive grandmother’s consent. The trial court assumed jurisdiction and terminated her rights under several statutory grounds.
The Court’s Holding
The Michigan Court of Appeals held that the trial court properly exercised jurisdiction over CP under MCL 712A.2(b)(2). At the time of the petition, the mother had not arranged housing where CP could live, despite living herself in a program that barred children.
But the court held that DHHS did not prove termination grounds by clear and convincing evidence. Although the mother could not yet provide CP proper care and custody because she lacked child-appropriate housing, the record did not show that she could not obtain it within a reasonable time. Her past abuse of MP was relevant but not conclusive evidence of future risk to CP; the eight-year passage of time, changed circumstances, rehabilitation, therapy, stable employment, and support system substantially diminished its probative value. The court affirmed jurisdiction, reversed the termination ruling, vacated the termination order, and remanded.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s past abuse of one child may support anticipatory-neglect findings, but it cannot alone establish a current likelihood of harm without clear and convincing evidence tied to present circumstances.
- Sex-offender registration permits DHHS to seek termination at the initial disposition, but it does not lower DHHS’s burden to prove a statutory termination ground.
- Evidence of rehabilitation, treatment participation, stability, and a realistic path to housing can defeat a finding that a parent cannot provide care within a reasonable time.
Why It Matters
The decision emphasizes the distinction between jurisdiction and termination. A newborn’s lack of an available home can support jurisdiction, yet termination still requires a much stronger, forward-looking showing that the parent cannot safely care for the child within a reasonable time.
For child-protection cases involving prior abuse of a sibling, the opinion requires courts to evaluate the parent’s current fitness and the specific evidence of future risk, rather than treating prior conduct as dispositive.