The Michigan Supreme Court issued a decision in *In re Lange*, a complex child welfare case that highlights the intersection of mental health care and child protection services. The case involved the Department of Health and Human Services' petition to take jurisdiction of a minor, identified as DVL, from his mother under Michigan's Child Protection Act.
The case originated in June 2021 when the mother brought DVL to St. John Hospital following a mental health crisis. DVL, who had a documented history of mental illness and multiple mental health diagnoses, had attempted to start a fire in his mother's home and threatened to commit suicide. The incident prompted his mother to seek immediate psychiatric care for her child.
DVL was held at St. John Hospital while DHHS searched for an appropriate inpatient pediatric psychiatric program. However, despite the search for specialized mental health treatment, DVL remained at the hospital without receiving the psychiatric care he needed. The situation became more complicated when, rather than transferring DVL to a psychiatric facility as initially planned, the hospital cleared him for discharge in July 2021.
The hospital recommended that DVL return home to receive intensive outpatient mental health services instead of continued inpatient treatment. This recommendation created a difficult situation for the mother, who made the decision that would become the central issue in the legal proceedings that followed.
The mother refused to pick DVL up from the hospital, explaining her reasoning to both hospital staff and DHHS officials. She stated that bringing DVL home would create dangerous conditions that could endanger not only DVL himself, but also the family pets, her other children, and herself. This refusal was based on her assessment of the ongoing safety risks given DVL's recent behavior and mental health crisis.
Following the mother's refusal to take DVL home, DHHS filed a petition in Wayne Circuit Court seeking to take jurisdiction of the minor under MCL 712A.2(b)(1) or (2). These provisions of Michigan's Child Protection Act allow the court to take jurisdiction when a child's parent or guardian neglects or refuses to provide proper care and guidance, or when the child's home or environment is unfit for the child.
The case proceeded through several hearings in the trial court before Judge Frank S. Szymanski. During these proceedings, the court had to weigh the complex factors involved, including the mother's legitimate safety concerns, the child's mental health needs, the adequacy of available community-based services, and the appropriate role of child protective services in cases involving mental health crises.
The trial court ultimately denied DHHS's petition, finding that the circumstances did not warrant removing the child from his mother's custody. This decision was later appealed, eventually reaching the Michigan Supreme Court after the case worked its way through the appellate process.
The Michigan Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the application for leave to appeal on October 9, 2024, and issued its decision on April 14, 2025. The case was assigned docket number 166509.
This case illustrates the challenging situations that can arise when mental health crises intersect with child welfare systems. Parents of children with serious mental health conditions often face difficult decisions about treatment options and safety concerns, particularly when adequate inpatient psychiatric care is not readily available.
The case also highlights ongoing issues with Michigan's mental health care system, particularly the availability of appropriate inpatient psychiatric treatment for children and adolescents. The fact that DVL was held at a general hospital for weeks while DHHS searched for a suitable psychiatric program underscores the shortage of specialized mental health resources.
The mother's refusal to take her child home, while it triggered child protective services involvement, was based on legitimate safety concerns about the risk of harm to DVL and other family members. This situation demonstrates the complex position parents can find themselves in when trying to ensure their child receives appropriate mental health care while also protecting the safety of all family members.
The Supreme Court's decision in this case will likely provide guidance for future situations where parents of children with mental health conditions make difficult decisions about care and safety. The ruling may also influence how DHHS approaches cases involving mental health crises and parental decision-making about treatment.
This case reflects broader challenges in the child welfare system's handling of mental health issues and the need for better coordination between mental health providers, hospitals, and child protective services to ensure children receive appropriate care while maintaining family stability when possible.
The decision comes at a time when Michigan and other states are grappling with increased awareness of children's mental health needs and the importance of having adequate resources and services available to support families facing mental health crises.