Child’s best interests; Relative placement; “Relative”; MCL 712A.13a(1)(j); “Fictive kin”; MCL 712A.13a(1)(j)(ii)

Holding that “the trial court failed to duly consider whether CJM was placed with a relative at the time of termination,” the court vacated the trial court’s best-interests determination and remanded. Respondent-father argued, “among other things, that the trial court clearly erred by failing to consider whether Pulsipher was a ‘relative’ of CJM as defined by MCL 712A.13a(1)(j), and therefore whether CJM’s placement with her weighed against termination of his parental rights.” The court agreed. “The trial court did not consider whether Pulsipher fit the ‘fictive kin’ definition of ‘relative’ within MCL 712A.13a(1)(j)(ii), but the record in this case, as it now stands, suggests that she did. It was undisputed throughout the proceedings that Pulsipher regularly cared for CJM since birth, and the caseworker testified at the termination hearing that CJM considered Pulsipher to be his mother. DHHS specifically requested that the court directly place CJM in Pulsipher’s care due to their close relationship, and the trial court itself had referred to Pulsipher as CJM’s ‘fictive kin.’” Thus, there was “ample basis in the present record to conclude that Pulsipher constituted a ‘relative’ under the version of MCL 712A.13a(1)(j) applicable when respondent’s parental rights were terminated—which, in turn, would mean that CJM was in the care of a relative at the time of termination, and the trial court, when making its best-interests determination, was required to expressly consider CJM’s placement with Pulsipher as weighing against termination.” The court concluded that these “considerations were wholly absent from the trial court’s best-interests determination. And, as this Court has made clear, ‘[a] trial court’s failure to explicitly address whether termination is appropriate in light of the child[]’s placement with relatives renders the factual record inadequate to make a best-interest determination and requires reversal.’” It retained jurisdiction.