IN RE DYLAN SAUNDERS MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DYLAN SAUNDERS, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
July 15, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 279935
Monroe Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 06-019627-NA
PAMELA WALKOWSKI,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JACK SAUNDERS,
Respondent.
In the Matter of DYLAN SAUNDERS, Minor.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 279936
Monroe Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 06-019627-NA
JACK SAUNDERS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
PAMELA WALKOWSKI,
Respondent.
-1-
Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Talbot and Donofrio, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In these consolidated appeals, respondents appeal as of right from the order terminating
their parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) (the conditions that led to
the adjudication continue to exist); (c)(ii) (other conditions exist and are not rectified); (g)
(failure to provide proper care or custody); and (j) (the child is likely to be harmed if returned to
the parent’s home). Because the trial court did not err in finding that the child’s best interest did
not preclude termination of respondents’ parental rights, we affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the minor child’s best interests did not
preclude termination of respondents' parental rights. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich
341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Although provided with numerous services, respondents
could not rectify the conditions that brought Dylan into care. They continued to use substances
and did not complete substance abuse treatment or regularly attend AA/NA. They failed to
finish domestic violence counseling and parenting classes, and they did not obtain suitable
housing and income. While respondents did attend counseling for a time, at least two domestic
violence incidents occurred in 2007, and each parent used substances within one month of the
final hearing. Respondents had failed to visit Dylan between January and June 2007. Dylan is
very young, and the evidence did not show a strong parent-child bond. Respondents made some
strides near the end, but their progress was insufficient and the trial court did not believe that
they genuinely wished to change or would be able to within a reasonable time. The record
supports the trial court’s conclusions.
The trial court did err in placing the burden on respondents to show that it would clearly
not be in Dylan’s best interests to terminate their parental rights. Trejo, supra at 354-356. But
the error was harmless in the present case, where the evidence overwhelmingly supported the
trial court’s ruling concerning the child’s best interests.
Affirmed.
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
-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.
