IN RE JASON ALLEN SCHARLOW JR MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of JASON ALLEN SCHARLOW,
JR., Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
January 29, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 279926
Muskegon Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-031301-NA
JESSICA PORTER,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JASON ALLEN SCHARLOW, SR.,
Respondent.
In the Matter of JASON ALLEN SCHARLOW,
JR., Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 279927
Muskegon Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-031301-NA
JASON ALLEN SCHARLOW, SR.,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JESSICA PORTER,
Respondent.
-1-
Before: Beckering, P.J., and Sawyer and Fort Hood, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, respondents appeal as of right from a circuit court order
terminating their parental rights to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i),
(g), (h), and (j). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j) were each
established by clear and convincing evidence with respect to respondent Porter. In re IEM, 233
Mich App 438, 450; 592 NW2d 751 (1999). Respondent Porter had a long-term substance abuse
history and was advised from the outset of the importance of obtaining treatment. She made
minimal efforts to participate in treatment and continued to abuse drugs throughout the pendency
of the proceedings.
Respondent Scharlow concedes that there was sufficient evidence to establish statutory
grounds for termination. He argues, however, that termination of his parental rights was contrary
to the child’s best interests. Respondent Porter similarly argues that termination of her parental
rights was not in the child’s best interests.
Once a statutory ground for termination has been proven, “the court shall order
termination of parental rights . . . unless the court finds that termination of parental rights to the
child is clearly not in the child’s best interests.” MCL 712A.19b(5). Although the child loved
and missed respondent Scharlow, he required a stable and permanent home life. Respondent
Porter was unable to provide it because of her substance abuse problem and, because of his
incarceration, respondent Scharlow would not be able to provide it for several years. Under the
circumstances, the evidence did not clearly show that termination of respondents’ parental rights
was not in the child’s best interests. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 354, 356-357; 612
NW2d 407 (2000). Thus, the trial court did not clearly err in terminating respondents’ parental
rights to the child. Id. at 356-357.
Affirmed.
/s/ Jane M. Beckering
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
-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.
