IN RE ADKINS MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of HOUSTON ADKINS and
SANDRA ADKINS, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES,
UNPUBLISHED
April 23, 2009
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 288592
Ottawa Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 08-060904-NA
BRYAN KEITH ADKINS,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Borrello, P.J., and Murphy and M. J. Kelly, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent appeals as of right the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights to the
minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i). Because there were no errors warranting relief,
we affirm.
Respondent does not dispute that § 19b(3)(b)(i) was established by clear and convincing
legally admissible evidence. MCR 3.977(E)(3). He only challenges the trial court’s best
interests decision. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the trial court did not clearly err
in finding that termination of respondent’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.
MCL 712A.19b(5). Although the children loved respondent and he was their primary source of
financial support, the evidence showed that respondent was a pedophile who preyed upon
children of both sexes that he was raising as his own. A sexual abuse counselor testified that it
was not unusual for a child to love his or her abuser, especially where the child has been
“groomed” or conditioned to accept the abuse. The evidence also showed that the children’s
mother was unlikely to protect the children from respondent. Therefore, the trial court did not
clearly err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the children. In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341,
356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
Affirmed.
/s/ Stephen L. Borrello
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Michael J. Kelly
-1-
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.
