IN RE PARKER MINORS

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of SARAH DIANNE PARKER and RACHEL ANNE PARKER, Minors. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, UNPUBLISHED November 16, 2006 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 270109 Oakland Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 05-710163-NA NICK ALLEN PARKER, Respondent-Appellant. Before: Fort Hood, P.J., and Murray and Donofrio, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating his parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(i) and (j). We affirm. The trial court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 3.977(J); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Respondent pleaded no contest to the allegations in the petition that he had sexual contact with his oldest daughter and had also physically fought with her. He also pleaded no contest to the criminal charges of accosting a minor for immoral purposes and indecent exposure. A forensic psychologist testified at the best interests hearing that respondent was at a moderate to high risk to re-offend based on the length of time he had been in treatment, the nature of the offense, and his responses to several psychological inventories. Respondent admitted to the psychologist that he had been physically abusive to both his oldest daughter and her mother and blamed them both for his actions. Further, 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); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Although the psychologist also testified that it would not be in the children’s best interests to have no opportunity for future contact with respondent, particularly because of the younger girl’s bond with respondent, and respondent’s sister testified to a close extended family relationship with the two girls, there was also a reasonable likelihood that one or both girls would be harmed if returned to respondent’s care. Therefore, the court did not err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the minor children. -1- Affirmed. /s/ Karen M. Fort Hood /s/ Christopher M. Murray /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.