In the Interest of I.A., Minor Child, L.F.H., Mother
17-1203
| Iowa Ct. App. | Oct 25, 2017Background
- Laura (mother) has mild intellectual disability and mental-health diagnoses; child I.A. removed in Nov. 2015 after reports of domestic violence in the child’s presence and the mother’s association with a man with a child-abuse history.
- I.A. (born ~2014) was adjudicated CINA and placed with the same foster family where she remained and was thriving.
- Laura engaged with services, completed substance-abuse treatment, improved supervised parenting skills, and asked for more visitation; professionals nevertheless remained concerned about her judgment in selecting associates.
- DHS and FSRP workers testified Laura benefitted from supervised visits and education, but repeatedly associated with unsafe individuals and resisted ongoing in-person therapy.
- DHS filed to terminate in Feb. 2017; the juvenile court terminated Laura’s parental rights under Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(d) and (h), finding reasonable efforts had been made and termination served the child’s best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether statutory ground for termination under § 232.116(1)(h) was proven | Laura: DHS failed to provide reasonable efforts (limited visitation), so statutory elements not met | State: Elements met — child under 3, adjudicated CINA, >6 months out of home, cannot be safely returned | Court affirmed: § 232.116(1)(h) proven by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether DHS made reasonable reunification efforts | Laura: DHS didn’t increase visitation despite requests; worker admitted poor planning | DHS: Provided extensive services tailored to Laura’s cognitive needs; supervision still necessary due to safety concerns | Court: DHS efforts were reasonable given child’s safety controls and Laura’s protective-capacity deficits |
| Whether termination was in child’s best interests under § 232.116(2) | Laura: Strong parent–child bond and good supervised parenting weigh against termination | State: Risk to child from Laura’s inability to identify dangerous people; foster home stable and adoption-ready | Court: Termination serves child’s safety, stability, and long-term needs; affirmed |
| Role of parent–child bond and visitation in avoiding termination | Laura: Close bond and desire for more visitation justify additional time | DHS: Bond important but does not overcome safety risks; more or extended supervised visits would not eliminate concerns | Court: Bond is mitigating but insufficient to outweigh safety and placement stability concerns |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996) (one statutory ground suffices to affirm termination)
- In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (standard for appellate review of termination issues)
- In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100 (Iowa 2014) (timing reference for assessing whether child can be returned)
- In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (DHS reasonable-efforts principle and its effect on termination burden)
- In re M.B., 553 N.W.2d 343 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996) (best-interests control visitation reasonableness)
- In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764 (Iowa 2012) (framework for best-interests analysis in termination cases)
- In re L.G., 532 N.W.2d 478 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995) (de novo review standard for termination appeals)
- In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212 (Iowa 2016) (weight given to juvenile court credibility findings)
- In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (clear-and-convincing evidence standard explained)
- In re N.F., 579 N.W.2d 338 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998) (parent–child closeness is a mitigating factor but not dispositive)