Dispositional Options and Requirements

13.9Dispositional Options and Requirements

A court must “enter an order of disposition as provided in the Juvenile Code and [the Michigan Court Rules].”¹ MCR 3.973(F)(1).

A.Dispositional Requirements

“[I]f the court finds that a [child] is within [the Juvenile Code], the court shall order the [child] returned to his or her parent if the return of the [child] to his or her parent would not cause a substantial risk of harm to the [child] or society.” MCL 712A.18(1). The court may also enter any of the dispositional options listed in MCL 712A.18(1). Id.

B.Dispositional Options Available to Court

If the court finds that a child is within its jurisdiction, “[t]he court . . . may enter any of the following orders of disposition that are appropriate for the welfare of the [child] and society in view of the facts proven and ascertained:”

(1) Warn the child’s parents, guardian, or custodian and dismiss the petition, MCL 712A.18(1)(a).

(2) Under supervision, return the child home or place the child with a relative,² MCL 712A.18(1)(b).

(3) The court must not place the child in a court-supervised foster care home,³ MCL 712A.18(1)(c).

(4) Place the child in a private institution or agency, MCL 712A.18(1)(d).

(5) Place the child in a public institution or agency, MCL 712A.18(1)(e).

(6) Provide health care, MCL 712A.18(1)(f).

(7) Order the parents, guardian, custodian, or any other person to refrain from conduct harmful to the child, MCL 712A.18(1)(g). See also MCR 3.973(A) and MCL 712A.6.⁴

(8) Appoint a guardian for the child, MCL 712A.18(1)(h).

(9) Include an order for child support with disposition, MCR 3.973(F)(5).

1.Warning and Dismissal of Petition

The court may warn a child’s parents, guardian, or custodian and dismiss the petition. MCL 712A.18(1)(a).

2.In-Home Placement With Supervision

a.Placement

The court may order supervision and return the child to his or her home or place the child with a relative.⁵ MCL 712A.18(1)(b). See In re Brown (Abijah), 171 Mich App 674 (1988) (Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s placement of the children with their father, where custody had previously been awarded to the respondent-mother in divorce proceedings, but where the respondent-mother pled no contest to physically abusing one of the children in the child protective proceeding).

If the court issues a dispositional order that removes the child from the parent’s custody at any time, MCL 712A.18(1)(p) requires that the parent receive parenting time unless certain circumstances exists. For a discussion on required parenting time under MCL 712A.18(1)(p), see Section 13.9(D).

b.Terms of Supervision

The court must order terms and conditions of supervision, including reasonable rules governing the conduct of the parents, guardian, or custodian “as the court determines necessary for the physical, mental, or moral well-being and behavior of the [child].” MCL 712A.18(1)(b). A trial court’s authority to enter a disposition order under MCL 712A.18(1)(b) extends to any conduct the court might find harmful to the child:

“In analyzing [MCL 712A.18(1)(b) (allowing court to place child under in-home supervision and may also include reasonable rules of conduct for parents, guardian, or custodian) and MCL 712A.18(1)(g) (allowing court to order any person to refrain from conduct considered harmful to child], it is significant to note that these dispositional orders are stated in broad, general terms. The court may provide ‘reasonable rules for the conduct of the parents [or other persons or adults] [designed for the well-being of the child].’ Also, the court may order parents [or other persons or adults] to discontinue conduct which, ‘in the opinion of the court,’ causes a child to come within the court’s jurisdiction. Thus, we hold that the Legislature has conferred very broad authority to the . . . court. There are no limits to the ‘conduct’ which the court might find harmful to a child. The Legislature intended that the court be free to define ‘conduct’ as it chooses. Moreover, in light of the directive that these provisions are to be ‘liberally construed’ [(under MCL 712A.1(3))] in favor of allowing a child to remain in the home, we find these sections supportive of the court’s order prohibiting the father from living with his daughter.” In re Macomber, 436 Mich 386, 393 (1990).

3. Placement in Foster Care Home

“If a [child] is within the court’s jurisdiction under [MCL 712A.2(b), the court shall not place a juvenile in a foster care home subject to the court’s supervision.” MCL 712A.18(1)(c).⁷ See also Wayne Co v State, 202 Mich App 530, 535 (1993), which states that although the court is prohibited from supervising such placement under MCL 712A.18(1)(c), it does have the authority to place a child in private foster care under MCL 712A.18(1)(d) (foster care in a private institution or agency that is licensed and supervised by the DHHS’s Division of Child Welfare Licensing). Wayne Co, 202 Mich App at 535.

4.Placement in Private Institution or Agency

The court may place the child in a private institution or agency “approved or licensed by the department’s division of child welfare licensing for the care of [children] of similar age, sex, and characteristics.” MCL 712A.18(1)(d). However, if the child is not a ward of the court, the child must be placed with the DHHS for commitment to an institution or agency the DHHS determines most appropriate and “subject to any initial level of placement the court designates.”⁸ Id.

If the court places a child in a private institution or agency, it must “transmit with the order of disposition or supplemental order of disposition a summary of its information concerning such child, and such child may be placed in the care of a county agent, probation officer, juvenile matron or some other reliable person designated by the court to be conveyed to the institution[.]” MCL 712A.24.

Note: If a child is placed in a private institution or agency, the court must require a progress report on the child “be made at least once every 6 months from the date of the order.” MCL 712A.24.

a.Religious Affiliation

With the exception of a child placed in a state institution, a child’s religious affiliations must be protected by ordering placement in a private child-placing or child-caring agency or institution, if available. MCL 712A.18(1)(e).

b.Child Placed Outside of Michigan

“If desirable or necessary, the court may place a ward of the court in or commit a ward of the court to a private institution or agency incorporated under the laws of another state and approved or licensed by that state’s department of social welfare, or the equivalent approving or licensing agency, for the care of children of similar age, sex, and characteristics.” MCL 712A.18a.

5.Placement in Public Institution or Agency

The court may place a child in a public institution or agency “authorized by law to receive [children] of similar age, sex, and characteristics.” MCL 712A.18(1)(e). However, if the child is not a ward of the court, the child must be placed with the department for placement in or commitment to an institution or agency the department determines most appropriate and “subject to any initial level of placement the court designates.”⁹ Id.

Unless placement is with a state institution, a child’s religious affiliations must be protected by placement in a private child-placing or child-caring agency or institution, if available. MCL 712A.18(1)(e).

If the court places a child in a public institution or agency, it must “transmit with the order of disposition or supplemental order of disposition a summary of its information concerning such child, and such child may be placed in the care of a county agent, probation officer, juvenile matron or some other reliable person designated by the court to be conveyed to the institution[.]” MCL 712A.24.

6.Order Health Care

The court may order a child to be provided “with medical, dental, surgical, or other health care, in a local hospital if available, or elsewhere, maintaining as much as possible a local physician-patient relationship, and with clothing and other incidental items the court determines are necessary.” MCL 712A.18(1)(f).

Note: Under MCL 722.124a(1), when a child is placed outside the home under the Juvenile Code, a child placing agency, the department,¹⁰ or the court may consent to “routine, nonsurgical medical care, or emergency medical and surgical treatment” of a child. See Section 3.3 for a detailed discussion of ordering medical treatment for a child, and Section 8.6(C) for a detailed discussion of the authority to consent to medical treatment.

A parent established as unfit during the adjudicative phase “must yield to the trial court’s [dispositional] orders regarding the child’s welfare.” In re Deng, 314 Mich App 615, 625, 627 (2016) (finding “a parent who has been adjudicated as unfit [does not have] the right during the dispositional phase of the child protective proceedings to object to the inoculation of her children on religious grounds[;]” “following adjudication, which affords a parent due process for the protection of his or her liberty interests, the parent is no longer presumed fit to make decisions for the child and that power, including the power to make medical decisions involving immunization, rests instead with the court^[¹¹]”), citing MCL 712A.18(1)(f) and In re Sanders, 495 Mich 394, 409-410, 418 (2014).

7.Order Parents, Guardian, Custodian, or Other Person to Refrain From Conduct Harmful to the Child

The court may “[o]rder the parents, guardian, custodian, or any other person to refrain from continuing conduct that the court determines has caused or tended to cause the [child] to come within or to remain under [the court’s jurisdiction,] or that obstructs placement or commitment of the [child under a dispositional order].” MCL 712A.18(1)(g). See also MCR 3.973(A) (purpose of dispositional hearing includes determining “what measures the court will take with respect to a child properly within its jurisdiction and, when applicable, against any adult”) and MCL 712A.6 (court has jurisdiction over adults and may make orders affecting adults where the court determines it is necessary for a child’s physical, mental, or moral well-being).¹² But see In re Sanders, 495 Mich 394, 414 (2014), “rejecting any interpretation of MCL 712A.6 and MCR 3.973(A) that fails to recognize the unique constitutional protections that must be afforded to unadjudicated parents, irrespective of the fact that they meet the definition of ‘any adult[,]’” and noting that “the court’s authority during the dispositional phase is limited by the fact that the state must overcome the presumption of parental fitness by proving the allegations in the [child protective] petition.”

A trial court’s authority to enter a disposition order under MCL 712A.18(1)(g) extends to any conduct the court might find harmful to the child:

“In analyzing [MCL 712A.18(1)(b) (allowing court to place child under in-home supervision and may also include reasonable rules of conduct for parents, guardian, or custodian) and MCL 712A.18(1)(g) (allowing court to order any person to refrain from conduct considered harmful to child], it is significant to note that these dispositional orders are stated in broad, general terms. The court may provide ‘reasonable rules for the conduct of the parents [or other persons or adults] [designed for the well-being of the child].’ Also, the court may order parents [or other persons or adults] to discontinue conduct which, ‘in the opinion of the court,’ causes a child to come within the court’s jurisdiction. Thus, we hold that the Legislature has conferred very broad authority to the . . . court. There are no limits to the ‘conduct’ which the court might find harmful to a child. The Legislature intended that the court be free to define ‘conduct’ as it chooses. Moreover, in light of the directive that these provisions are to be ‘liberally construed’ [(under MCL 712A.1(3))] in favor of allowing a child to remain in the home, [the Michigan Supreme Court] find[s] these sections supportive of the court’s order prohibiting the father from living with his daughter.” In re Macomber, 436 Mich at 393.

“An order directed to a parent or a person other than the [child] is not effective and binding on the parent or other person unless opportunity for hearing is given by issuance of summons or notice as provided in [MCL 712A.12] and [MCL 712A.13] and until a copy of the order, bearing the seal of the court, is served on the parent or other person as provided in [MCL 712A.13].” MCL 712A.18(4).¹³ Moreover, procedural “due process requires that every parent receive an adjudication hearing before the state can interfere with his or her parental rights.”¹⁴ In re Sanders, 495 Mich 394, 412-13 n 8, 407, 422 (2014) (finding unconstitutional the one-parent doctrine, which permitted the court to “enter dispositional orders affecting parental rights of both parents” once “jurisdiction [was] established by adjudication of only one parent”).¹⁵

A parent’s constitutional right to direct his or her child’s care and custody before the parent is adjudicated is not without limit; “[w]hen a child has been placed into care by an unchallenged order of the court, the state has a legitimate and important interest in protecting the child’s health and safety.” In re Dixon (On Reconsideration), ___ Mich App ___, ___ (2023) (court was permitted to continue the child’s placement in foster care until the DHHS could properly investigate placement of the child with a nonrelative as proposed by the child’s incarcerated father).

8.Appointment of Guardian for Child

A court may appoint a guardian under MCL 700.5204, if it receives a petition requesting appointment of a guardianship over the child from a person interested in the child’s welfare. MCL 712A.18(1)(h).¹⁶ If the court grants the request and appoints a guardian, it may enter an order dismissing the petition under the Juvenile Code. Id.

9.Order Child Support Payments

The court may order one or both of the child’s parents to pay child support. MCR 3.973(F)(5). To order child support under MCR 3.973(F), the court must use the Michigan Child Support Formula, MCL 552.605, and the Uniform Support Order, MCR 3.211(D). MCR 3.973(F)(5).

C.Supplemental Orders of Disposition

If a child remains under the jurisdiction of the court, an order of disposition may be amended or supplemented in accordance with MCL 712A.18 at any time the court considers necessary and proper. MCL 712A.19(1).¹⁷ Such an amended or supplemented order “must be referred to as a ‘supplemental order of disposition’.” MCL 712A.19(1).

D.Parenting Time

“In a proceeding under [MCL 712A.2(b)] or [MCL 712A.2(c)], if a [child] is removed from the parent’s custody at any time, the court shall permit the [child’s] parent to have regular and frequent parenting time with the [child]. Parenting time between the [child] and his or her parent shall not be less than 1 time every 7 days unless the court determines either that exigent circumstances require less frequent parenting time or that parenting time, even if supervised, may be harmful to the [child’s] life, physical health, or mental well-being. If the court determines that parenting time, even if supervised, may be harmful to the [child’s] life, physical health, or mental well-being, the court may suspend parenting time until the risk of harm no longer exists. The court may order the [child] to have a psychological evaluation or counseling, or both, to determine the appropriateness and the conditions of parenting time.” MCL 712A.18(1)(p).

An unadjudicated father who is incarcerated is entitled to parenting time with his minor child.¹⁸ In re Dixon (On Reconsideration), ___ Mich App ___, ___ (2023).

¹ See SCAO form JC 17, Order of Disposition (Child Protective Proceedings), at https://www.courts.michigan.gov/494d1a/siteassets/forms/scao-approved/jc17.pdf.

³Applies when a child is within a court’s jurisdiction under MCL 712A.2(b). A court may place a child in a foster home under court supervision if the court has jurisdiction of the child under MCL 712A.2(a) or MCL 712A.2(h)

⁴ But see In re Sanders, 495 Mich 394, 414, 414 n 10 (2014), “rejecting any interpretation of MCL 712A.6 and MCR 3.973(A) that fails to recognize the unique constitutional protections that must be afforded to unadjudicated parents, irrespective of the fact that they meet the definition of ‘any adult[,]’” and noting that “the court’s authority during the dispositional phase is limited by the fact that the state must overcome the presumption of parental fitness by proving the allegations in the [child protective] petition.”

⁷A court may place a child in a suitable foster home under court supervision if the court has jurisdiction of the child under MCL 712A.2(a) or MCL 712A.2(h).

⁸ MCL 400.55(h) requires a county office of the DHHS to provide supervision of or foster care services to children under the Family Division’s jurisdiction when ordered by the court.

⁹ MCL 400.55(h) requires a county office of the DHHS to provide supervision of or foster care services to children under the Family Division’s jurisdiction when ordered by the court.

¹⁰ For purposes of the Child Care Licensing Act, MCL 722.111 et seq., “[d]epartment means the department of health and human services and the department of licensing and regulatory affairs or a successor agency or department responsible for licensure under this act. The department of licensing and regulatory affairs is responsible for licensing and regulatory matters for child care centers, group child care homes, family child care homes, children’s camps, and children’s campsites. The department of health and human services is responsible for licensing and regulatory matters for child caring institutions, child placing agencies, children’s therapeutic group homes, foster family homes, and foster family group homes.” MCL 722.111(1)(m).

¹¹ “[T]he facts proved and ascertained [must] demonstrate that immunization is appropriate for the welfare of the juvenile and society.” In re Deng, 314 Mich App at 625 (physician recommendations sufficed in this case), citing MCL 712A.18(1)(f).

¹² See Section 4.10 for additional information on the court’s jurisdiction and authority over adults.

¹⁴ “[N]either the admissions made by [the adjudicated parent] nor [the unadjudicated parent’s] failure to object to those admissions constituted an adjudication of [the unadjudicated parent’s] fitness[.]” In re SJ Temples, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued March 12, 2015 (Docket No. 323246) (finding that the trial court violated the unadjudicated parent’s “due process rights by subjecting him to dispositional orders without first adjudicating him as unfit[]”). Note that unpublished opinions are not precedentially binding under the rule of stare decisis. MCR 7.215(C)(1).

¹⁵ Where “a minor faces an imminent threat of harm, . . . the state may take the child into custody without prior court authorization or parental consent[;] . . . [s]imilarly, upon the authorization of a child protective petition, the trial court may order temporary placement of the child into foster care pending adjudication if the court finds that placement in the family home would be contrary to the welfare of the child.” In re Sanders, 495 Mich at 416-17 n 12 (limiting the requirement for adjudication over each parent to “the court’s exercise of its postadjudication dispositional authority”). See Chapter 3 for additional information on taking temporary protective custody over a child, and Chapter 8 for additional information on temporary placements pending adjudication.

¹⁸In this case, for at least 10 months, the DHHS had failed to arrange for virtual/video visits between the child and his incarcerated father. In re Dixon (On Reconsideration), ___ Mich App ___, ___ (2023).