In the Interest of C.A., Minor Child, A.P., Mother, B.A., Father
17-0835
| Iowa Ct. App. | Nov 8, 2017Background
- Child C.A. born 2012; mother petitioned to terminate father's parental rights under Iowa Code § 600A.8(3).
- Father was incarcerated before the child’s birth and sentenced to 18 years (entered Alford plea in 2013).
- Father had only two in-person visits (pretrial and a 2014 two-hour prison visit) and claimed occasional letters, emails, phone calls, and participation in a prison storybook program.
- Mother testified father’s contact dwindled; in 2016 child received only a birthday and a Christmas card; father provided no financial support despite prison employment.
- District court found father had no established emotional bond, made only minimal contact, provided no financial support, and had a history of violent/criminal behavior and abuse toward the mother.
- District court terminated parental rights as abandonment under § 600A.8(3) and found termination was in the child’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether father abandoned child under Iowa Code § 600A.8(3) | Mother: father failed to maintain "substantial and continuous or repeated contact"—little visitation, minimal communication, no financial support | Father: incarceration limits physical contact; he made attempts to stay relevant via letters, calls, storybook program | Held: Father abandoned child; contact and support insufficient to avoid statutory abandonment finding |
| Whether father’s incarceration excuses absence for abandonment analysis | Mother: incarceration does not excuse failure to maintain contact or support | Father: imprisonment hindered visits but he attempted other forms of contact | Held: Incarceration is not an automatic excuse; father's limited efforts and no financial support do not negate abandonment |
| Whether termination is in child’s best interests under chapter 600A (and § 232.116 factors) | Mother: termination promotes child’s safety, stability, and long-term nurturing | Father: no one else to be a father figure; termination risks child becoming state dependent | Held: Termination is in child’s best interests given lack of bond, safety concerns from father’s criminal history, and uncertainty about post-release behavior |
| Whether district court erred applying chapter 232 best-interest framework to chapter 600A case | Father: court applied chapter 232 standard incorrectly | Mother: chapter 232 framework is useful and appropriate precedent supports use | Held: No reversible error; court may use § 232.116 factors to assess best interests under chapter 600A |
Key Cases Cited
- In re R.K.B., 572 N.W.2d 600 (Iowa 1998) (standard of appellate review in termination appeals)
- In re M.M.S., 502 N.W.2d 4 (Iowa 1993) (incarceration does not automatically excuse failure to parent)
- In re G.A., 826 N.W.2d 125 (Iowa Ct. App. 2012) (a parent’s subjective intent alone does not preclude abandonment finding)
- In re W.W., 826 N.W.2d 706 (Iowa Ct. App. 2012) (financial non-support can establish abandonment even without court-ordered support)
- In re A.H.B., 791 N.W.2d 687 (Iowa 2010) (chapter 232 best-interest framework is useful when evaluating best interests under chapter 600A)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (U.S. 1970) (explaining Alford plea concept)