In the Interest of G.F. and A.S., Minor Children, A.M., Mother
16-1353
| Iowa Ct. App. | Oct 26, 2016Background
- April 2015: Police arrested mother Stephanie and father Y.F. for domestic assault; both parents had been using methamphetamine and the two children, A.S. (9) and G.F. (3), tested positive and were adjudicated CINA and removed.
- Throughout 2015–2016 Stephanie repeatedly relapsed into methamphetamine use (positive tests in Feb–Mar 2016), missed and cancelled many visitations, and stopped working with a domestic-violence advocate.
- Stephanie maintained a continuing relationship with Y.F., a domestic abuser and registered sex offender, despite testifying she had ended it; the juvenile court found her testimony not credible.
- The State petitioned to terminate parental rights under Iowa Code §§ 232.116(1)(f), (h), and (i); the juvenile court found clear and convincing evidence to terminate in July 2016.
- The juvenile court found termination was in the children’s best interests given unresolved substance abuse, domestic-violence safety risks, inconsistent visitation, and the need for permanency; guardian ad litem supported termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory grounds for termination under §232.116(1)(f) (A.S.) and (h) (G.F.) were proved by clear and convincing evidence | Stephanie: State’s allegations of substance abuse, domestic violence, and instability were unproven | State: Mother’s recent relapse, continued relationship with an abusive registered sex offender, inconsistent visitation, and lack of progress show children could not be returned safely | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supported termination under (f) and (h) |
| Whether termination is in the children’s best interests under §232.116(2) | Stephanie: Strong parent–child bond; no one better positioned to provide lifelong love and affection | State: Children’s safety, need for permanency, and mother’s unresolved issues outweigh bond | Affirmed: best interests favor termination and placement in pre-adoptive foster care |
| Whether the closeness of the parent–child relationship precluded termination under §232.116(3)(c) | Stephanie: Bond with children outweighs need for permanency | State: Bond did not outweigh the children’s need for a stable, safe permanent home; professionals recommended prompt permanency | Affirmed: court permissively declined to avoid termination under §232.116(3)(c) |
| Whether to grant a six‑month extension under §232.104(2)(b) for reunification | Stephanie: Requests additional six months to stabilize housing, employment, and recovery | State: Little evidence mother would resolve addiction or domestic‑violence risk; children had been out of home for 12+ months | Denied: court found inadequate likelihood the need for removal would end after six months; proceedings require urgency |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764 (Iowa 2012) (an unresolved, severe, chronic drug addiction can render a parent unfit)
- In re T.S., 868 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015) (parent’s lack of understanding about domestic violence supports termination)
- In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (three-step framework for termination analysis: grounds, best interests, permissive exceptions)
- In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212 (Iowa 2016) (de novo review in termination proceedings while giving weight to juvenile court credibility findings)
- In re L.G., 532 N.W.2d 478 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995) (clarifies clear-and-convincing standard in juvenile cases)
- In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (appellate review gives weight to juvenile court fact-findings)
- In re A.A.G., 708 N.W.2d 85 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005) (courts view termination proceedings with urgency after prolonged out-of-home placement)