Judge orders child removed from mother’s custody, places child with paternal aunt after department alleges parenting and safety concerns

A judge in Lenawee County Probate & Juvenile Court ordered the removal of a child from his mother’s custody effective today and placed the child with a vetted paternal aunt after the department presented reports it said showed a substantial risk of harm.

The department’s counsel, Sasha Thomas, told the court the agency had provided a court report, an Adrian police report and multiple service-provider accounts raising concerns about the mother’s parenting and stability. "We are asking the court to set this for a standard 90‑day review," Thomas said, and recommended removal to foster care with placement with a relative to ensure the child receives developmental evaluations and therapy.

Chelsea Grant, the department caseworker, testified the child was living with the mother while the mother participated in Odyssey House’s outpatient recovery program but that the mother had previously left a Sacred Heart inpatient program against medical advice. Grant said Odyssey House and prior providers reported several incidents—described in reports as the mother "dragging him by the arm," yelling, and an overheard comment quoted as "she was going to beat the f out of him." Grant also testified that, despite efforts, the mother had not yet secured services or completed transfers for the child’s developmental assessments and speech therapy since entering the outpatient program.

The mother, Taylor Bixler, testified she is sober, described barriers transferring Community Mental Health records between counties and said she left inpatient care because the child was not receiving needed services there. "I love my son," Bixler told the court. She denied intentionally harming him and described one arm‑grab as an effort to prevent the child falling down a staircase. Bixler said she would re-enter inpatient treatment if the court ordered it.

Michael McFarland, counsel for the mother, criticized reliance on anonymous peer reports and said those witnesses could not be questioned. He urged the court to delay or accelerate review rather than order removal immediately. "My client is sober," McFarland said, arguing the record did not contain live testimony corroborating anonymous allegations.

Carson Howard, the guardian ad litem, said he had met the child and observed developmental and communication concerns in person; he supported the department’s request for removal so the child could promptly access services.

In a detailed oral ruling the presiding judge reviewed the case history (including a no‑contest plea entered May 5, 2026), referenced an Adrian police report in mid‑May that the judge said showed the child had been exposed to a dangerous household dynamic, and found that continuing custody with the mother presented a substantial risk to the child’s physical health and mental well‑being. The court concluded that, given the documented history of substance use, domestic‑violence dynamics, and recent failures to ensure timely services for the child, removal was necessary to safeguard the child.

The court ordered the department to effectuate the removal immediately and to place the child with the identified paternal aunt who had been vetted by the department. The judge directed the department to arrange visitation, make referrals for bonding and trauma assessments, and set the matter for review and permanency on Sept. 14, 2026, at 10:30 a.m.

The order and the court’s findings were limited to the record presented at the hearing; the department relied in part on written reports and anonymous peer reports from service providers, and defense counsel emphasized those reports’ limits. The next procedural step is the scheduled review and permanency hearing in September, when the court will consider the mother's progress and the child's services and placement stability.