In the Interest of C.W. and L.W., Minor Children, R.A., Father, 16-0909

Background

Children L.W. (born 2013) and C.W. (born 2015) were removed from their mother's care in October 2015 and placed with their maternal aunt after concerns the mother left them unattended and failed to meet basic needs.
Father Robert, then a juvenile/adolescent with a history of delinquency and domestic-abuse convictions, was incarcerated on felony charges at the time of removal; paternity was confirmed by test results filed March 4, 2016.
After release in January 2016, Robert contacted DHS and FSRP workers, sought visitation and services, secured housing and employment, and began batterer’s education; he had one visitation that occurred due to FSRP miscommunication before paternity results were filed.
The juvenile court issued a March 15, 2016 permanency order finding aggravated circumstances and waiving DHS’s obligation to make reasonable efforts; it also suspended parental visitation and directed a termination petition.
The State filed to terminate parental rights on March 18, 2016; the juvenile court terminated Robert’s rights in May 2016, finding statutory grounds and that termination was in the children’s best interests.
On appeal, the Iowa Court of Appeals reviewed de novo, concluding the record did not support waiving reasonable efforts and remanding for an additional six months of services and visitation opportunities.

Issues

Issue	Father’s Argument	State’s Argument	Held
Whether DHS made reasonable efforts and whether the juvenile court properly waived reasonable-efforts requirement under aggravated-circumstances doctrine	Robert: DHS did not make reasonable efforts; he repeatedly sought visitation and services after release and was barred from visits until paternity results	Aggravated circumstances (parental criminal history, incarceration, limited participation) justified waiver and suspension of visits	Reversed: no clear-and-convincing evidence of aggravated circumstances as to Robert; DHS failed to provide reasonable efforts (notably, visitation) after removal
Whether statutory grounds for termination were proven by clear and convincing evidence	Robert: State failed to show that conditions could not be corrected within a reasonable time given his recent progress and lack of opportunity to demonstrate parenting	State: Father’s history of delinquency, incarceration, and limited prior engagement supports termination under section 232.116 grounds	Court did not reach independent new finding of statutory ground because termination was premature given lack of reasonable efforts; remanded for further proceedings with six-month extension
Whether termination is in the children’s best interests	Robert: Additional time and visitation would allow demonstration of stable housing, employment, and parenting capacity	State: Children’s need for permanency and relative placement support termination	Court: Best-interests analysis inconclusive without allowing father reasonable efforts and visitation; presumption of reunification not rebutted
Whether additional six months would allow reunification	Robert: Six months with services and visitation would let him solidify improvements and show fitness	State: Trial was scheduled quickly; permanency concerns argued	Held: Court ordered six-month extension for reunification efforts and visitation consistent with children’s best interests

Key Cases Cited

In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100 (Iowa 2014) (standard of de novo review in termination appeals)
In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (State’s burden to prove statutory grounds by clear and convincing evidence)
In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (reasonable-efforts requirement and circumstances permitting waiver)
In re B.B., 826 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa 2013) (clarifying burdens and protections in termination proceedings)
In re K.N., 625 N.W.2d 731 (Iowa 2001) (de novo review principles in juvenile cases)
In re M.B., 553 N.W.2d 343 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996) (visitation is important to reunification)
In re B.F., 526 N.W.2d 352 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994) (termination as last resort)
In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (parental rights as an important protected interest)
In re T.D.C., 336 N.W.2d 738 (Iowa 1983) (presumption that reunification serves child’s best interests)
State v. Null, 836 N.W.2d 41 (Iowa 2013) (youth and brain-development considerations in sentencing context cited for developmental maturity discussion)