IN RE SIRK/CRONK MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of PATRICK CRONK, ANDRE
CRONK, and AALYHEA CRONK, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
December 9, 2008
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285321
Berrien Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2006-000087-NA
PATRICK CRONK,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
STACEY CRONK,
Respondent.
In the Matter of SAMANTHA SIRK, PATRICK
CRONK, ANDRE CRONK, and AALYHEA
CRONK, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 285323
Berrien Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 2006-000087-NA
STACEY CRONK,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
PATRICK CRONK and TODD SIRK,
-1-
Respondents.
Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Bandstra and Donofrio, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, respondents Patrick Cronk and Stacey Cronk appeal as of
right from the trial court’s order terminating their parental rights to the minor children pursuant
to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) (conditions that led to the adjudication continue to exist), (g) (failure
to provide proper care and custody), and (j) (reasonable likelihood children will be harmed if
returned to the parents’ home). Because the trial court did not clearly err in finding that the
statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence with respect
to respondents Patrick Cronk and Stacey Cronk, we affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination
were established by clear and convincing evidence with respect to each respondent. MCR
3.977(J); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000); In re BZ, 264 Mich App
286, 296; 690 NW2d 505 (2004). Respondents’ children were made temporary court wards after
respondents were evicted from their home. Respondents left their children with relatives and
respondents relied on friends for temporary lodging. Despite participating in services for more
than 18 months, neither respondent was able to rectify the conditions that led to adjudication.
They failed to establish stable employment, and both had quit jobs without arranging for other
employment. Additionally, at the time of the termination hearing, respondents were three
months behind on their rent. Respondents also failed to appreciate the effect of their chaotic
lifestyle and instability on the children. Two of the children had not received proper dental care
and had eight cavities each, and Stacey Cronk’s daughter was two years behind in school and
unable to read. Respondents also repeatedly exposed the children to inappropriate persons
without agency approval, and tended to blame relative caregivers for their problems.
Although respondents emphasize their participation in services, as this Court observed in
In re Gazella, 264 Mich App 668, 676; 692 NW2d 708 (2005), “it is not enough to merely go
through the motions physically; a parent must benefit from the services offered so that he or she
can improve parenting skills to the point where the children would no longer be at risk in the
parent's custody.” Because the circumstances had not materially changed after approximately 18
months of services, the trial court did not clearly err in finding that termination was warranted
under §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j).
Affirmed.
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/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.
