Termination under §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g), & (j); In re Moss Minors; In re LaFrance Minors; In re Miller; In re Ellis; Children’s best interests; In re Medina; In re White; Whether the trial court created a barrier to respondent-mother’s regaining custody of her children & violated MCL 712A.18(1)(n); In re Utrera; Court-ordered drug testing; Due process; Local Emergency Fin. Assistance Loan Bd. v. Blackwell

Holding that § (c)(i) supported termination and that it was in the children’s best interests, the court affirmed the order terminating respondent-mother’s parental rights. The trial court held “that clear and convincing evidence had been presented that more than 182 days had elapsed since the trial court’s initial dispositional order, and that the conditions that led to the adjudication continued to exist and would likely continue to exist.” The record supported this finding. “More than a year and a half elapsed after the initial dispositional order before respondent’s parental rights were terminated.” The trial court assumed jurisdiction over the children because of her substance abuse and the consequent criminality. At the time of the termination hearing, she continued to use opioids and to violate probation. Although she “regained custody of the children temporarily by complying with her service plan for 13 months, shortly after the children were returned to her care, respondent threatened suicide and, upon admission to a psychiatric hospital, tested positive for opioids. Several months later, she again tested positive for opioids at a hospital following an alleged suicide attempt, and again when she reported for incarceration related to a probation violation. Respondent’s failure to resolve her drug use, mental health issues, and criminal behavior leading to incarceration in the lengthy period of time the children were in care support the trial court’s conclusion that she would not be able to parent” them in a reasonable time. Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that termination was warranted under § (c)(i). “Because establishing one statutory ground by clear and convincing evidence is sufficient to terminate a parent’s parental rights,” the court declined to address the other grounds for termination.