A Lenawee County judge on the record ordered termination of the parental rights of Harold Hollis and Erica Hollis in File 24099, concluding the parents had not remedied the conditions that led to the child's removal and had failed to benefit from court-ordered services.

The court found that both statutory grounds and the child's best interest supported termination. Judge Judd said the record showed the parents were respondents in the child-protective proceeding for more than 182 days and that efforts toward reunification and adoption had been documented. “We will enter an order terminating the parental rights of Harold and Erica Hollis,” the judge said during the hearing.

The court's decision followed closing arguments from attorneys and the child's guardian ad litem. Nicole Underwood, the guardian ad litem, urged termination, saying the parents had not complied with their case service plans and that the child had experienced instability and emotional harm while living with the parents. “I never really like to recommend termination. However, in this case, the parents have done very little to benefit their daughter,” Underwood said.

Counsel for the department likewise relied on the petition filed in July seeking termination and noted domestic violence, prior reports of the mother being found in a ditch during a psychotic episode, and a lack of meaningful substance-use treatment. Department counsel pointed to positive drug screens for methamphetamine and amphetamine in the record and to ongoing police involvement at the parents' residence.

Attorneys for the parents asked the court to deny termination and to restore parenting time to allow the family another chance at reunification. Mr. McFarlane, counsel for the mother, argued the mother had acknowledged a substance-use problem and asserted the parents had made housing improvements and maintained a bond with the child. “Couples argue. I don't know any couple that doesn't argue,” he told the court while urging that the parents be given further opportunity to engage in services.

In written and oral findings summarized on the record, the judge cited multiple factors underlying the decision: documented domestic violence dynamics; the mother's intermittent psychiatric hospitalizations and reports of hearing voices; parents' inconsistent engagement with substance-use and mental-health services; the child's developmental delays (including speech and fine motor concerns) that were being addressed in the relative placement; and documented incidents requiring police response, including an incident in June referenced in the record.

The court found the child, described in the record as about 3 years old, has formed strong emotional attachments to the relatives providing care and is receiving medical and developmental services there. The department and guardian ad litem reported a high likelihood of adoption in the present placement. The judge concluded returning the child to either parent would pose a significant risk of harm and that termination of parental rights was supported by clear and convincing evidence under the statutory sections cited in the hearing.

The judge directed the case to proceed under the adoption code and said the parents retain the right to appeal and to request appointed counsel for an appeal if they cannot afford one. The court also said it would set a review hearing as required and would monitor the department's adoption efforts.

The orders will be issued from the court and the record notes that both parents may file post-decision appeals. No specific dates for an appeal deadline or the adoption finalization were provided on the record.