IN RE WARE/WHITE/BLACK MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of JESSICA INEZ WARE, JALYSSA LYNNE WHITE, JALEN QUANTREL WHITE, and KENNETH BLACK, Minors. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED September 14, 2004 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 251142 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 01-397618 THERESA LYNN WARE, Respondent-Appellant, and THOMAS W. SANDERS, a/k/a THOMAS W. SAUNDERS, and GREGORY WHITE, Respondents. Before: Donofrio, P.J. and White and Talbot, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court orders terminating her parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g), and (j). Because the trial court did not clearly err in finding clear and convincing evidence for termination of parental rights, and termination was not clearly contrary to the children’s best interests, we affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(A) and (E)(1)(b). The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination in subsections (c)(i), (g), and (j) were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 3.977(J); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 353; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). The principal condition leading to the adjudication was respondent-appellant's severe substance abuse addiction The evidence established that respondent-appellant failed to complete several treatment programs and was still abusing drugs in the months preceding the final custody hearing. Two prior attempts at reunification were unsuccessful because of her substance abuse problems. -1- Further, the evidence did not show that termination of respondent-appellant's parental rights was clearly not in the children's best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); Trejo, supra at 356357. Although there was a loving bond between respondent-appellant and the children, other evidence demonstrated that the children's continued frustration and uncertainty over their placement was affecting their mental and emotional well-being. Respondent-appellant relapsed more than three times during the pendency of the case. The children need a permanent, stable, safe home, which respondent-appellant cannot provide. Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in terminating respondent-appellant's parental rights. Affirmed. /s/ Pat M. Donofrio /s/ Helene N. White /s/ Michael J. Talbot -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.