IN RE AMBER LEE WALKER-GOODRICH MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of AMBER LEE WALKERGOODRICH, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
March 11, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 281192
Emmet Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 07-005530-NA
LYNDSAY ALLISON WALKER,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: O’Connell, P.J., and Borrello and Gleicher, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent appeals as of right from a circuit court order terminating her parental rights
to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(m). We affirm. This appeal is being decided
without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Respondent does not challenge the trial court’s determination that a statutory ground for
termination was established by clear and convincing evidence. She contests only the trial court’s
determination regarding 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). We review for clear error
the trial court’s decision regarding the child’s best interests. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341,
356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
The evidence showed that respondent suffered from severe mental illness that effectively
prevented her from raising a child on her own. There was conflicting evidence whether
respondent acted appropriately during supervised visitation, but the evidence clearly
demonstrated that respondent had a history of substance abuse and severe depression and that she
lacked the basic skills necessary to care for an infant. Shortly after turning one year old, the
court took custody of the child. Within two weeks, respondent reported that she was homeless.
The record also showed that respondent failed to take advantage of the virtually unlimited
visitation available to her. During a telephone call to the child, respondent expressed no love or
affection for her, and instead spoke about the weather. Additionally, she voluntarily absented
-1-
herself from the termination hearing. A psychologist testified that the child would benefit to a
limited extent from supervised contact with respondent until age two, but that the harm resulting
from the lack of such contact would be minimal. In contrast, the evidence suggested that if
respondent raised the child, the child would probably have to adapt to an environment devoid of
normal human affection and interpersonal relating, leaving her at high risk for developmental
delays and emotional instability.
Under the circumstances, the trial court did not clearly err in determining that the
evidence, on the whole record, did not show that termination of respondent’s parental rights was
clearly contrary to the child’s best interests. In re Trejo Minors, supra at 356-357. Therefore,
the trial court did not err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the child.
Affirmed.
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
/s/ Stephen L. Borrello
/s/ Elizabeth L. Gleicher
-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.
