Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS

In the Matter of ASHLEY STEVENSON, Minor.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V KATHERINE STEVENSON, a/k/a KATHY STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellant, and WILLIAM STEVENSON, Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED March 23, 2006

No. 264404 Kent Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 03-055341-NA

In the Matter of JACOB STEVENSON, Minor.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V KATHERINE STEVENSON, a/k/a KATHY STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellant, and WILLIAM STEVENSON, Respondent. No. 264405 Kent Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 03-055342-NA

-1-


In the Matter of ALEXANDRA STEVENSON, Minor.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V KATHERINE STEVENSON, a/k/a KATHY STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellant, and WILLIAM STEVENSON, Respondent. No. 264406 Kent Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 03-055343-NA

In the Matter of ANDREW STEVENSON, Minor.

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee, V KATHERINE STEVENSON, a/k/a KATHY STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellant, and WILLIAM STEVENSON, Respondent. No. 264407 Kent Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 03-055344-NA

Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Wilder and Zahra, JJ. PER CURIAM. -2-

In these consolidated appeals, respondent-appellant Katherine Stevenson appeals as of right from the order of the trial court terminating her parental rights to her minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), (g), and (j). We affirm. Respondent-appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding that clear and convincing evidence supported termination of her parental rights pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), (g), and (j). We disagree. Contrary to respondent-appellant's contention, ample evidence existed on the record to support the trial court's decision. The children were removed from the home shortly after it became known that respondent William Stevenson has sexually assaulted respondent-appellant's older daughter Amanda, his stepdaughter, on numerous occasions. Respondent-appellant refused to believe that the assaults had occurred even after William Stevenson had pleaded guilty to the charges. Although respondent-appellant participated in services, her ongoing denial impeded her ability to make any progress that would facilitate the return of the children to her. Respondent appellant also made little progress in controlling her anger or gaining emotional stability sufficient to enable her to parent the children. At the time of termination, respondent-appellant had yet to address the family dynamics that were negatively affecting the children and had not demonstrated that she could provide a safe, stable home for the children. The trial court therefore did not err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination had been established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 3.977(J); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1997). For the same reasons, the trial court did not err in determining that termination was not contrary to the best interests of the children. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Affirmed. /s/ Joel P. Hoekstra /s/ Kurtis T. Wilder /s/ Brian K. Zahra

-3-




Download IN RE ANDREW STEVENSON MINOR.pdf

Michigan Law