In the Interest of B.R., Minor Child, N.R., Father, L.P., Mother
16-0968
| Iowa Ct. App. | Nov 23, 2016Background
- Child B.R. (born 2007) lived with father after parents never married; father obtained physical custody by stipulated decree in Jan 2012 amid concerns about mother’s substance abuse and mental health.
- DHS safety plan required supervised visitation; mother attended visits infrequently (11 visits in 2012, 9 in 2013, 12 in 2014, 7 in 2015) with multiple multi-month gaps and often gave no notice when she failed to appear.
- Mother’s home was subject to an April 2012 search revealing drugs, paraphernalia, and loaded guns; a half‑sibling tested positive for methamphetamine and the mother’s parental rights to that child were terminated in 2013.
- Mother was arrested multiple times in 2015, incarcerated in late 2015, and began writing weekly letters to B.R. while jailed; she visited two days before the termination hearing held in April 2016.
- Father petitioned in Feb 2016 to terminate mother’s parental rights for abandonment under Iowa Code chapter 600A; juvenile court denied termination finding mother was making efforts and that B.R. resisted a relationship; father appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Father) | Defendant's Argument (Mother) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mother abandoned B.R. under Iowa Code § 600A.8(3) | Mother failed to provide support or maintain substantial, continuous or repeated contact (visits or regular communication) since 2012 | Mother claimed father told her B.R. needed nothing; she blamed communication problems on father not returning calls and contended she had recently begun contact efforts (letters, recent visits) | Court held mother abandoned B.R.: clear and convincing evidence of abandonment via failure to support and repeated lack of visits/communication |
| Whether incarceration justified mother’s failure to visit | Father: incarceration resulted from mother’s chosen lifestyle and does not excuse lack of relationship | Mother: implied constraint while incarcerated limited visits/communication | Court: incarceration does not excuse failure to maintain relationship when resulting from voluntary lifestyle choices; prior long absences preclude excuse |
| Whether father unreasonably impeded visitation | Mother alleged father/stepmother set times and places that prevented contact | Father showed times were reasonable given DHS-supervised requirement and child’s schedule | Court found no evidence father unreasonably prevented visitation; mother often cancelled or failed to provide notice |
| Whether termination is in child’s best interests | Father: child has stability, safety, and desire for adoption by stepmother; mother’s history of substance abuse and criminality harms child | Mother: recent treatment and contacts show improvement and willingness to parent | Court held termination serves child’s best interests given mother’s instability, prior harm to children, minimal recent contact, and child’s need for permanency |
Key Cases Cited
- In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96 (Iowa Ct. App. 2010) (standard of de novo review in chapter 600A termination proceedings)
- In re A.H.B., 791 N.W.2d 687 (Iowa 2010) (burden and best‑interest framework in private termination proceedings)
- In re G.A., 826 N.W.2d 125 (Iowa Ct. App. 2012) (parental intent not required for abandonment; reasonableness of visitation conditions)
- In re J.L.W., 523 N.W.2d 622 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994) (actions speak louder than words for abandonment analysis)
- In re W.W., 826 N.W.2d 706 (Iowa 2012) (section 600A.8(3)(b) support element not limited to court‑ordered payments)
- In re M.M.S., 502 N.W.2d 4 (Iowa 1993) (incarceration generally does not excuse lack of relationship when resulting from voluntary lifestyle)