IN RE JOHN MOSES THURMOND MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of J.M.T., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 19, 2002
Petitioner-Appellee,
V
No. 240173
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 98-373756
YOLANDA YVETTE STRINGER,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Griffin, P.J., and Gage and Meter, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent appeals as of right the order terminating her parental rights. We affirm. This
appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Respondent’s case was referred to protective services when her son tested positive for
cocaine at birth. Respondent’s parental rights to four other children had been terminated earlier
in the year. After a hearing, the court terminated respondent’s parental rights under MCL
712A.19b(3)(g), (i), and (j).
Under MCL 712A.19b(3), the petitioner for the termination of parental rights bears the
burden of proving a statutory ground for termination. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341; 617
NW2d 407 (2000). Once the petitioner has presented clear and convincing evidence that
persuades the court that at least one ground for termination is established, termination of parental
rights is mandatory unless the court finds that termination is clearly not in the child’s best
interests. Id. at 355-356. Decisions terminating parental rights are reviewed for clear error. Id
at 356.
MCL 712A.19b(3) provides for termination of parental rights when
(g) The parent, without regard to intent, fails to provide proper care or
custody for the child and there is no reasonable expectation that the parent will be
able to provide proper care and custody within a reasonable time considering the
child’s age.
-1-
* * *
(i) Parental rights to 1 or more siblings of the child have been terminated
due to serious and chronic neglect or physical or sexual abuse, and prior attempts
to rehabilitate the parents have been unsuccessful.
(j) There is a reasonable likelihood, based on the conduct or capacity of
the child’s parent, that the child will be harmed if he or she is returned to the
home of the parent.
There is clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of respondent’s
parental rights. The evidence established that respondent had a long-term substance abuse
problem, and she was not able to provide proper care and custody for the child. Her parental
rights to four other children were terminated the same year that this child was born. Those
parental rights were terminated due to substance abuse problems and respondent’s failure to
provide proper care and custody. Where the child tested positive for cocaine at the time of his
birth, and respondent had a continuing drug problem, it was reasonably likely that he would be
harmed if returned to respondent’s custody. There was no evidence that termination was not in
the child’s best interests.
Affirmed.
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Hilda R. Gage
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
-2-
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.