OCTOBER 1 IS HERE, which means Michigan Justice for Kids and Communities - Juvenile Justice reform statutes and rules are in effect. The juvenile Justice Partnership Committee has worked closely with SCAO and DHHS to implement the provisions of Michigan’s Juvenile Justice Reforms. 

JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM KEY PROVISIONS:

• Eliminate most non-restitution fees and costs associated with juvenile justice system involvement, including costs of care, services, and court-appointed representation. The legislation also removes the parent or guardian burden to pay for costs associated with diversion services and ensures that youth are no longer placed outside of their home solely for nonpayment or refusal to perform community services.
  • Most counties are no longer collecting fees.

 

The Michigan Supreme Court is blazing trails with implementation of its most recent amendment to MCR 1.109(D)(1)(b).  Now, when addressing parties to an action, “Courts must use the individual’s name, the designated salutation or personal pronouns, or other respectful means that are not inconsistent with the individual’s designated salutation or personal pronouns when addressing, referring to, or identifying the party or attorney, either orally or in writing.”  The rule further specifies that preferred forms of address may include Ms. Mr. or Mx., as the parties or counsel prefer, and pronouns shall include he/him/his, she/her/hers, or they/them/theirs. Michigan is the first state to enact such a court rule. MCR 1.109(D)(1)(b). The Rule passed by a 5-2 vote, and went into effect January 1, 2024.

​The change creates space for counsel and parties to provide the court with their preferred pronouns and salutations.  “Our courts and court staff must conduct business in a way that is cognizant of changes in language and societal norms.  The amendments to MCR 1.109(D) reflect that basic truth and acknowledge that with changes in our society, our vocabulary also evolves. In order to be fair and impartial, courts, as the face of the third branch of government, must conduct business in a way that does not give the appearance of misgendering individuals, intentionally or otherwise. . .” stated Justice Welch in her concurring opinion regarding the rule. MCR 1.109(D) (Welch, J., concurring).

Aggravated circumstances are not necessarily new to neglect cases, however, the appellate courts have been focusing on this and other issues arising in the child welfare arena lately.  A review and examination of the law as it presently stands may be helpful.
 
What are aggravated circumstances?  They refer to statutorily defined conduct that, when found by the judicial officer, removes the requirement of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (“the Department”) to provide reasonable efforts towards reunification and relieves the agency of the obligation to provide services to the parent.  Aggravated circumstances are found in two statutes, MCL 712A.19a(2) and MCL 722.638.  The first is the permanency planning statute and the second is part of the child protection law.  Many of the aggravated circumstances are similar to the grounds for termination of parental rights in MCL 712A.19b(3).

In family law, Judges, lawyers, and litigants are always trying to find new ways to assist families in a manner that avoids constant litigation. Litigation takes time and resources from the Court, which is already overburdened. In addition, litigation is very hard on families. While a trial is an option, it is usually a very invasive, unpleasant experience that can leave a family even more broken than before. For these reasons, alternative dispute resolution methods can be a great solution for many families. Courts have many options, such as FIG conferences at the FOC, mediation, collaborative law, or arbitration. The use of these methods vary by county.

In some counties, courts and litigants have started utilizing guardian ad litems (GAL), lawyer-guardian ad litems (LGAL), and parenting coordinators with greater regularity. While these roles have existed within the law for some time, an increase in use has been seen in recent years. Along with the greater use, however, comes confusion regarding what these roles are and how they can be used.

Part of the confusion in defining these three roles is that the term guardian and guardian ad litem are used throughout several areas of law. Therefore, many may have trouble distinguishing which laws apply to which role. Further, while there is some guidance for these roles in statute, not all are well defined, and there is not a large body of case law.