IN RE FOSTER/DOTMAN/CAMPBELL MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of MICHAEL FOSTER, ASHLEY
FOSTER, JOSHUA DOTMAN and SPENCER
CAMPBELL, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 6, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 232419
Emmet Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-004435-NA
WILLIAM CAMPBELL,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JODY FOSTER, ROBERT
JEFFREY ALLAN MILLER,
DOTMAN,
and
Respondents.
In the Matter of MICHAEL FOSTER, ASHLEY
FOSTER, JOSHUA DOTMAN and SPENCER
CAMPBELL, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 232684
Emmet Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-004435-NA
JODY FOSTER,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
-1-
WILLIAM CAMPBELL, ROBERT DOTMAN,
and JEFFREY ALLAN MILLER,
Respondents.
Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Wilder and Schmucker*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondents William Campbell (hereinafter “respondent-father”) and Jody Foster
(hereinafter “respondent-mother”) appeal as of right from the trial court’s order terminating their
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(g), (j) and (k)(i).1 We affirm.
We are not persuaded by respondents’ arguments that the trial court lacked jurisdiction.
The record indicates that respondents’ home was unfit because of drug abuse and that there was a
reasonable likelihood the children would be harmed if returned to their custody. There was a
sufficient basis for the family court to assume jurisdiction. MCL 712A.2(2)(b)(1) and (2); In re
Toler, 193 Mich App 474, 476; 484 NW2d 672 (1992).
Also, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for
termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5,974(I); In re Miller, 433
Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). There is no merit to respondent-father’s argument that
termination was not warranted because he never had custody of his son. Contrary to respondentfather’s claim, he was not considered “fit” to have custody of his other child, who was placed in
the custody of his mother. The record supports the family court’s conclusion that respondentfather’s home was not a safe place for the child, and that there was a reasonable likelihood that
the child would be harmed if returned to his care.
Nor is there any merit to respondents’ claims that the family court erred in failing to
discover and investigate the homes of relatives who could care for the children. Respondents’
only suggestion about relative placement came in respondent-mother’s last-minute justification
for why she left Michigan immediately after the birth of her youngest child without informing
the FIA. Moreover, the evidence presented at trial supports the conclusion that relative
placement would have been emotionally detrimental to the children.
1
The record indicates that the trial court terminated respondent-mother’s parental rights to all
four children, and respondent-father’s parental rights to Spencer Campbell, under §§ 19b(3)(j)
and (k)(i), and that respondent-mother’s parental rights to Ashley Foster, Joshua Dotman, and
Michael Foster were also terminated under § 19b(3)(g).
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-2-
Affirmed.
/s/ Martin M. Doctoroff
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
/s/ Chad C. Schmucker
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
