In the Interest of J.R., S.C., and J.R., Minor Children, K.R., Mother, 17-0556

Background

Mother (Kyra) and father (Shane) had a long history of domestic violence; DHS first involved in 2012 after alleged strangulation, and children were adjudicated CINA in 2014.
Despite court-ordered no-contact and participation in services, Kyra repeatedly had contact with Shane during 2014–2016; workers found Shane in her bed and hiding under her bed; Shane was present at the hospital when a newborn (J.L.R.) was removed.
The juvenile court previously terminated Shane’s parental rights; Shane had unresolved substance- and mental-health issues and was a documented danger to the children, sometimes acting violently in their presence.
The State petitioned to terminate Kyra’s parental rights to three children (J.C.R., S.C., J.L.R.). At the termination hearing Kyra denied contact but admitted some events and claimed Shane repeatedly violated her safety plans.
The juvenile court found Kyra’s explanations not credible, concluded she could not or would not protect the children from Shane, and terminated her rights under Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f) and (h).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Kyra)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
1) Were statutory grounds for termination proven (children could not be returned)?	Kyra: Court relied on credibility findings; she tried to cut off contact; domestic violence alone should not justify termination.	State: Kyra repeatedly maintained a relationship with abuser, placing children at risk; evidence shows ongoing contact and deception.	Held: Yes. Clear and convincing evidence that children could not be returned due to Kyra’s ongoing contact with Shane.
2) Is domestic violence/continued relationship with abuser by itself sufficient ground?	Kyra: Domestic violence alone shouldn’t be sole basis; she made safety plans and sought services.	State: Exposure to domestic violence risks children’s safety and future harm; courts may terminate when parent fails to protect children.	Held: Exposure and failure to protect can justify termination; domestic violence risk here supported termination.
3) Was termination contrary to children’s best interests given mother–child bond?	Kyra: Strong bond with children favors maintaining the relationship.	State: Child safety and long-term emotional needs outweigh parental bond if returning risks harm.	Held: Termination was in children’s best interests due to safety concerns and history of violence in children’s presence.
4) Should court have applied permissive factor or granted six-month extension?	Kyra: Court should decline termination under §232.116(3)(c) or grant additional time to reunify.	State: Kyra had repeated dishonesty, ongoing contact with Shane, and had ample time already; additional time unlikely to resolve risks.	Held: Court properly declined permissive factor and denial of six-month extension was warranted.

Key Cases Cited

In re C.C., 538 N.W.2d 664 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995) (upholding termination where continuation of abusive relationship exposed children to danger)
In re Marriage of Brainard, 523 N.W.2d 611 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994) (domestic abuse harms children’s emotional development and raises risk of physical abuse)
In re Marriage of Gensley, 777 N.W.2d 705 (Iowa Ct. App. 2009) (trial court credibility findings are given deference)
In re S.O., 483 N.W.2d 602 (Iowa 1992) (returning children to mother posed imminent risk due to her cohabitation with abusive father)
In re T.S., 868 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015) (domestic-violence coursework insufficient where mother continued contact in violation of no-contact order)
In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (best-interest framework: safety and long-term nurturing govern termination analysis)
In re D.S., 806 N.W.2d 458 (Iowa Ct. App. 2011) (§232.116(3) discretionary leniency to preserve parent-child relationship)
In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212 (Iowa 2016) (standard of review and clear-and-convincing evidence defined)
In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (upholding termination where statutory grounds shown by clear and convincing evidence)