IN RE CHRISTOPHER FEDEWA MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of MICHAEL GARRISON, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 20, 2003
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 248482
Ionia Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-000028-NA
SUSAN GARRISON,
Respondent-Appellant.
In the Matter of CHRISTOPHER FEDEWA,
Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 248483
Ionia Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 02-000029-NA
SUSAN GARRISON,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JOHN RAY WILES,
Respondent.
Before: Murray, P.J., and Gage and Kelly, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
-1-
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (c)(ii), (g), (j), and (l). We
affirm. This appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
It was undisputed that respondent-appellant’s parental rights to three older children were
terminated in 1990. This clear and convincing evidence alone was adequate to support
termination under MCL 712A.19b(3)(l). In re Powers Minors, 244 Mich App 111, 118; 624
NW2d 472 (2000).
Furthermore, respondent-appellant did not have suitable housing until shortly before the
termination hearing and it was unclear from the testimony whether her finances would allow her
to maintain this housing, as the record indicates respondent-appellant was unemployed. There
was also considerable testimony that respondent-appellant did not have the necessary mental and
emotional capacity to parent her children safely. While in her care, one of the children, who was
severely disturbed, went to therapy only sporadically. Despite parenting classes, respondentappellant failed to demonstrate appropriate parenting skills during visitation. In fact, the trial
court found that respondent-appellant’s extensive visitation with the children clearly
demonstrated her inability to provide appropriately for the children. Accordingly, the trial court
did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear
and convincing evidence. In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989).
Further, the evidence did not show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental
rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich
341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Thus, the trial court did not err in terminating respondentappellant’s parental rights to the children.
Affirmed.
/s/ Christopher M. Murray
/s/ Hilda R. Gage
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
-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.
