Mentally Ill Child Abandoned By Parents Declared Homeless

(Source: MIRS.news, Published 04/14/2025) A Michigan Supreme Court justice is asking the Legislature to determine the state's role over children whose parents claim they are unable to adequately care for a child with severe mental health issues.

Chief Justice-elect Megan Cavanagh's comments came as the majority agreed with a Wayne county circuit court judge that the Michigan department of health and human services (DHHS) did not have jurisdiction over the child, DVL,, when his parents refused to pick him up from a hospital and that he should be declared "homeless."

"The facts of this case continue to demonstrate why the 'available grounds for jurisdiction are ill-equipped to address situations' involving children with serious mental health diagnoses,"

Cavanagh wrote in her concurring opinion. "Parents who have gone to great lengths to help their mentally ill children but who ultimately exhaust the resources at their disposal should not suffer additional legal and collateral consequences."

The mother, who adopted DVL when he was 5 years old, took the then-13-year-old teen to a hospital in June 2021 to be medically cleared to enter an inpatient treatment program after he tried to start a fire in the home and threatened suicide.

The hospital cleared DVL for discharge a day after he was brought in, but the mother refused to pick him up, claiming he posed a danger to himself and his family.

DHHS filed a petition asking the court to take jurisdiction because the mother allegedly abandoned the teen. But the trial court declined the request, saying that under state law she did not abandon him.

The trial court declined the request and the Court of Appeals held in a 2-1 unpublished opinion that the trial court erred.

The Supreme Court reversed the appeals court's ruling,

Justice Richard Bernstein agreed the trial court did not abuse its discretion, but he disagreed with the majority's holding that MCL 712a.2(b)(3) "may support a finding of jurisdiction" in DVL's case.

Justice Brian Zahra dissented, noting the mother's "subjective perspective of risk and lack of culpability are not relevant to the statutory objective of a trial court assuming jurisdiction over a child under the child abuse and neglect prevention act."

Zahra wrote that the mother wants the court to take jurisdiction of her child, "but only on her terms," including not wanting the teen to be homeless.

"Having a court declare DVL 'homeless' apparently spares (the mother) from being deemed an unfit parent but does not allow the court to take custody of DVL, which, in turn, permits DHHS to provide him with additional care and maintenance," Zahra wrote, noting that both the mother and her attorney believe declaring DVL homeless is "the ideal solution."

Zahra added: "While I acknowledge this case presents a heart-wrenching situation, I disagree that declaring DVL homeless is ideal. Simply put, a parent who causes their child to become homeless has in fact neglected or abandoned the child."

Justice Kimberly Ann Thomas did not participate because the case was considered before she assumed office.