Approved, SCAO � PCS CODE: PRH/PHR/PHNTCS CODE: PRH/OFPHSTATE OF MICHIGANJUDICIAL CIRCUIT - FAMILY DIVISIONCOUNTY ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY HEARING(CHILD PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS)ORDER en-US en-US OF en-US en-USCASE NO.en-USPETITION NO.en-USCourt addressen-USCourt telephone no. 1. � In the matter of � en-USname(s), alias(es), DOB 2. � Date of hearing: en-US � Judge/Referee: en-USBar no. � 3. � Removal date: en-US en-US en-US(Specify for each child if different.) � � 4. � Military/nonmilitary affidavit attached. en-USTHE COURT FINDS: 5. � A petition has been submitted alleging that the above child(ren) come(s) within the provisions of MCL 712A.2(b). 6. � The child(ren) � is/are � is not/are not � subject to the continuing jurisdiction of another court. � � Court: en-US 7. � � Notice of hearing was given as required by law. � en-US Notice of proceedings is to be given as required by law. 8. � � a. There is probable cause to believe the legal/putative father(s) is/are: en-US(Name each child, his/her father, and whether legal or putative.) � � b. � The putative father of en-US en-US is unknown and cannot be identified. � 9. � The probable-cause determination was waived by all parties present. 10. � There � is � is not � probable cause that one or more of the allegations in the petition are true. � 11. � There is good cause to adjourn the preliminary hearing because en-US en-US . � � � Petitioner recommends removal of the child(ren) from the home to assure the immediate safety of the child(ren). � 12. � There is probable cause the � parent � guardian � legal custodian � other person � residing in the child(ren)'s � � home abused the child(ren). Presence of the alleged abuser in the home � does � does not � present a substantial � risk of harm to the child(ren)'s life, physical health, or mental well-being and he/she � should � en-US should not � be ordered out of the home. en-US(en-USUse form JC 65en-US, Order Removing Alleged Abuser from Child's Home, as appropriate.) American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com Order After Preliminary Hearing (Child Protective Proceedings) � (12/18) � Page of Order of Case No. Petition No. � 13. � The child(ren) has not/have not been removed prior to this hearing and an order to take the child(ren) into protective � � custody is necessary because: � a. � the child(ren) is/are at substantial risk of harm or is/are in surroundings that present an imminent risk of harm and the � child(ren)222s immediate removal from those surroundings is necessary to protect the child(ren)222s health and safety, � b. the circumstances warrant issuing this order; and � c. no remedy other than protective custody is reasonably available to protect the child(ren). � en-US(If item 13 is checked, contrary to the welfare and reasonable efforts findings must be made. See items 15 and 16.) � 14. � The child(ren) is/are Indian as defined in MCR 3.002(12). The petitioner � has � has not � � en-USgiven notice of the � preliminary hearing as required by MCR 3.920(C)(1). � en-US The preliminary hearing must be adjourned pending conclusion of a removal hearing required by MCR 3.967. � en-US The removal hearing required by MCR 3.967 was conducted in conjunction with this hearing en-US(see required findings in item 16). � � � A qualified expert, en-US en-US , testified as required by law. 15. � � a. � Contrary to the welfare findings were made in a prior order. � � b. � It is contrary to the welfare of the child(ren) to remain in the home because: en-US(Attach separate sheets as necessary.) � 16. � � a. � Consistent with the circumstances, reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) from the � � � home were made as determined in a prior order. � en-USOR � � b. � Consistent with the circumstances, reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) � � from the home. Those efforts include: (Specify below.) � � en-USOR � � c. � The child(ren) is/are Indian, and the court finds by clear and convincing evidence and the testimony of a qualified � � expert witness who has knowledge about the child-rearing practices of the Indian child222s tribe, that active efforts � � have � have not � been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent � � the breakup of the Indian family. These efforts have proved � unsuccessful, � successful, � the continued � � custody of the child(ren) by the parent or Indian custodian � is � is not � likely to result in serious emotional or � physical damage to the child(ren), and the child(ren) � should � should not � be removed from the home. � � en-US(Specify below.) � The efforts for 16.b. or 16.c. are: (Specify the efforts from 16.b. or 16.c. here. If the child is an Indian child, specify active efforts as defined � � en-USby MCR 3.002[1] and MCL 712B.3[a].) � � d. � Reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal of the child(ren) from the home were not made. American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow.com Order After Preliminary Hearing (Child Protective Proceedings) � (12/18) � Page of Order of Case No. Petition No. � 17. � a. � Reasonable efforts are not required to prevent or eliminate the child(ren)'s removal from the home due to the � mother � father � subjecting the child(ren) to the aggravated circumstance(s) of � en-US en-US as provided in section MCL 722.638(1) and (2), and as evidenced � by � en-US en-US � en-US � en-US en-US . � mother's � father's � conviction for murder of another child of the parent. � mother's � father's � conviction for voluntary manslaughter of another child of the parent. � mother's � father's � conviction for aiding or abetting in the murder or manslaughter of another � � child of the parent, attempting to murder the child(ren) or another child of the parent, or conspiring or soliciting to � commit the murder of the child(ren) or another child of the parent. � mother's � father's � conviction for felony assault that resulted in serious bodily injury to the � � child(ren) or another child of the parent. � mother's � father's � involuntary termination of parental rights to a sibling of the child(ren) and � failure by that parent to rectify the conditions that led to that termination. � mother � father � being required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act. � � b. � Reasonable efforts to preserve and reunify the family to make it possible for the child(ren) to safely return home are � � not required because the parent subjected the child or another child of the parent to one of the circumstances � � stated above. � � en-USOR � � still recommended because: � (When item 17 is checked, either complete item 19 below or schedule a permanency planning hearing within 28 days of this determination.) � 18. � � a. � Reasonable efforts shall be made to preserve and reunify the family to make it possible for the child(ren) to safely � � return home. � � � b. � Reasonable efforts shall not be made to preserve and reunify the family because it would be detrimental to the � � child(ren)'s health and safety. � 19. � Because reasonable efforts to prevent or eliminate removal or to reunite the child(ren) and family are not required, a � � permanency planning hearing was conducted. en-US(en-USUse and attach form JC 19en-US, Order Following Dispositional Review/Permanency Planning � Hearing.) 20. � Custody of the child(ren) with the parent/guardian/legal custodian � � � a. � presents a substantial risk of harm to the child(ren)'s life, physical health, or mental well-being. � � No provision of service or other arrangement except removal of the child(ren) is reasonably available to adequately � safeguard the child(ren) from the risk of harm to the child(ren)'s life, physical health, or mental well-being. � � Conditions of custody at the placement away from the home and with the individual with whom the child(ren) is/are � placed are adequate to safeguard the child(ren)'s health and welfare. � � b. � does not present a substantial risk of harm to the child(ren)'s life, physical health, or mental well-being. � 21. � � a. � All siblings are in joint placement. � � b. � All siblings are not in joint placement bec