Judge takes Lenawee County termination petition under advisement, sets adoption as permanency goal and schedules December review

A Lenawee County Probate & Juvenile Court judge on record during a permanency planning hearing took under advisement a request from the county child-welfare agency to terminate the parental rights of Jackie Lomas and Dakota Harmon Duckworth and directed that the child’s permanency goal be adoption, the court record shows.

The decision was not issued from the bench; the judge said the record and exhibits supported the department’s recommendation that the child remain in foster care and that adoption be the goal. The judge set the next review of permanency planning for December 16 at 9 a.m. and said a written opinion on the termination petition would be issued before that hearing or addressed on the record at the review.

Why it matters: termination of parental rights is permanent and irreversible. The child has been in foster care since Aug. 20, 2024, the court record shows, and the department urged the court to order termination after about a year of supervised services and monitored parenting time.

Department argument and evidence Sajah Thomas, counsel for the child-welfare agency, told the court the parents had been offered services and accommodations but "simply are not able to adequately care for this child at this time." Thomas emphasized evidence in the record that, in the department’s view, supports statutory grounds for termination and that the child needs permanency.

Eva Copas, a foster-care specialist who provided the agency’s updated court memo and testified at the hearing, said she has ongoing concerns about the mother’s ability to understand the child’s developmental stages and about repeated incidents involving the father and neighbors. Copas described recent parenting-time observations and reports and said the minor was "thriving in his current placement" but that department staff continued to have concerns about both parents’ ability to provide unsupervised care.

The agency pointed to a pattern of 9-1-1 calls and neighborhood altercations involving the father, documented in a police report attached to the department’s packet. Copas testified that police documentation described a physical tussle in which a witness stated the father threw a first punch; she also said she did not obtain underlying police call cards for all prior incidents.

Defense and parental testimony Attorneys for the parents challenged the department’s request. Counsel for the mother argued the department had not provided a formal ADA accommodation plan tailored to the mother’s cognitive and learning needs and said the mother had completed parenting programs, continued therapy and maintained supervised visits with the child. Counsel asked the court to deny termination and to order that the department develop or implement additional, specific accommodations.

Father Dakota Harmon Duckworth testified and answered questions about his income, housing, mental-health treatment and the parenting education videos he and his partner have been watching. He described recent steps to engage with community mental-health services and said he declined virtual (Zoom) parenting time because of visual and auditory sensitivities; counsel for the department and the guardian ad litem questioned whether that refusal limited his ability to establish a relationship with the child.

Counsel for the guardian ad litem noted the record shows the child is meeting developmental milestones in the foster home and urged the court to consider best-interest factors and the child’s need for permanency.

Court ruling and next steps The judge found on the record that the child is in a foster placement that is "the safest and least restrictive under the circumstances," directed the department to continue adoption efforts as the permanency goal and took the termination petition under advisement. The court scheduled the next permanency planning review hearing for December 16 at 9 a.m., and the judge said a written opinion on the termination petition would be issued before that date or addressed at the next hearing.

What was not decided today The court did not enter a final ruling terminating parental rights at this hearing. The judge explicitly took the petition under advisement and will issue a formal opinion on the termination petition before or at the December 16 review hearing.

Courtroom context Testimony and argument at the hearing included direct testimony from the department’s foster-care specialist, cross-examination from parent counsel, testimony by the father, and closing arguments from the department, the guardian ad litem and defense counsel. The hearing record includes agency reports, a police report tied to an August altercation, parenting-time logs and a psychological evaluation referenced in argument.

The court record notes the child has been in foster care since Aug. 20, 2024. The judge instructed the department to focus on adoption efforts during the upcoming review period and to submit any required updates prior to the December 16 hearing.