Judge schedules 90‑day review after DHHS reports parental substance‑use and safety concerns

The judge opened a first‑review hearing on the case and set a 90‑day review and a permanency‑planning hearing after the Department of Health and Human Services reported continuing concerns about both parents’ ability to safely care for their child.

Sarah Harvey, a foster care worker with the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), told the court the toddler is “doing wonderful” in a relative placement and is bonding and developing well, but that both parents have missed visits and face obstacles to reunification. “Her PBT test came back as 0.174,” Harvey said when describing a recent police report about the mother; the department also relayed an earlier incident that is the subject of an open investigation and that reportedly involved a possible sexual assault of a minor who had been in the mother’s care.

The department characterized the mother, identified in court as Alana Baker, as partially compliant with services but of continuing concern because of alcohol use, inconsistent honesty with providers, and episodes of assaultive behavior. The father, identified as Devin Guyton, has shown “little compliance,” Harvey said, with DHHS noting issues including substance use, unstable housing and incomplete benefit applications; a substance test administered during a psychological evaluation registered below the legal alcohol limit but positive for marijuana. Harvey told the court she saw “no progress toward reunification” for the father at this time.

The guardian ad litem, Bridal Berger, told the judge the child is in the least‑restrictive placement and appears to be thriving in that setting, but she urged serious attention to the parents’ barriers and said the department was justified in pursuing an accelerated timeline if substantial progress does not occur. “We don't have a ton of time,” Berger said, urging the parents to make prompt, meaningful changes.

Counsel discussed an additional police report circulated that day; the court agreed copies would be provided to counsel before leaving the courtroom. DHHS requested a permanency‑planning hearing and guidance on how therapeutic parenting time should be structured; the department said it may seek termination of parental rights at the next hearing if there are not significant changes.

Mother’s counsel said the mother intends to schedule treatment immediately with McCullough Vargas and to provide releases so providers can share progress with DHHS. Defense counsel for the father emphasized that a chemical alcohol test taken during a psychological evaluation returned below 0.08, while acknowledging the department’s broader concerns about his engagement with services.

The judge summarized the record, noting reasonable efforts toward reunification and that the child is in a safe, stable placement, and set the next court date as a 90‑day review and permanency‑planning hearing on February 24 at 8:30 a.m. The court also noted psychological evaluations for both parents were complete but that final reports and specific treatment dates were not yet available.

The court did not resolve the underlying CPS investigation in open court; DHHS and the relevant investigators continue to develop evidence. The hearing record reflects the department’s request that, absent significant change, the case proceed on an accelerated track toward permanency decisions. The matter was continued to the listed review date for further status reports and any formal motions that parties may bring.