In March, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that a father whose parental rights were terminated still had an obligation to continue paying child support for his two children. (See In re Beck Minors)
On Monday, in its first opinion of the 2010-2011 term, the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed that decision, but with a different analysis.
The court found the father had no constitutional due process claim, and the legislative clearly intended to keep “parental rights” separate from “parental duties.” (“The sole parental obligation identified in MCL 722.3 is the duty to provide a child with support …)
The plain language of the termination statute, MCL 712A.19b, only implicates “parental rights.” Thus, when parental rights are terminated, what is lost are those interests identified by the Legislature as parental rights. In other words, the terminated
parent loses any entitlement to the “custody, control, services and earnings of the minor . . . .” Because nothing in the language of MCL 712A.19b affects the duty of support articulated in MCL 722.3, the obligation remains intact.
Thus, even after a parent’s rights have been terminated, the obligation to support continues “unless a court of competent jurisdiction modifies or terminates the obligation . . . .” This provision of MCL 722.3 indicates that a court has the discretion to terminate or modify a parent’s obligation to provide support, but is not compelled to do so.
Six of the justices signed the opinion, which was penned by Justice Robert P. Young Jr. Justice Alton T. Davis recused himself because he was on the Court of Appeals panel that decided the case in March.