In the Interest of J.H., K.H., and K.A., Minor Children, J.L., Father of K.A., A.A., Mother, K.H., Father of J.H. and K.H.
17-1101
| Iowa Ct. App. | Oct 11, 2017Background
- IDHS removed three children after domestic violence (father Kory strangling mother while pregnant) and the newborn tested positive for methamphetamine.
- Mother (Annalease) and fathers (James and Kory) had long histories of substance abuse, untreated mental-health issues, unstable housing/employment, criminal behavior, and multiple incarcerations during the case.
- Parents showed minimal engagement: Annalease missed many visits and was absent eight months; Kory attended 19 of 50 visits (missed time due to incarceration); James attended 6 of 30 visits and had long disappearances.
- IDHS provided a broad range of services (therapy, substance treatment, parenting, visitation, drug testing, supervised visits, case management, etc.); parents did not request additional services in juvenile court except limited claims on visitation and written expectations.
- Juvenile court terminated parental rights under Iowa Code chapter 232; parents appealed only on reasonable-efforts, request for a six-month extension (James), and recusal/prejudice (Kory).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IDHS made reasonable efforts to reunify | Parents argue IDHS failed (denied visitation to incarcerated parents; James lacked a written expectations contract) | State: IDHS offered many services; visitation restrictions were due to facility rules or parent inaction; expectations were communicated orally | Court: Parents failed to preserve broader challenge; where preserved, IDHS made reasonable efforts under circumstances |
| Whether trial court should grant 6‑month continuance for James | James sought six more months to remedy deficiencies and reunify | State: James had no progress after prior extension; chaotic life, incapable of caring for medically fragile child | Court: Denied—no reason to believe six months would remove need for placement; child’s need for permanency prevails |
| Whether judge should have recused for bias (Kory) | Kory argued judge’s prior sentencing of him in unrelated criminal matters created bias | State: Prior judicial involvement in criminal cases alone does not require recusal; no evidence of actual bias | Court: Waived for failure to cite authority; alternatively, no abuse of discretion—no demonstrated partiality |
| Whether incarceration barred visitation as unreasonable efforts failure | Parents asserted denial of visitation while incarcerated undermined reunification efforts | State: Some facilities prohibit visits; parents failed to request visits when permitted; mother received visits when possible | Court: Rejected parents’ claim—no unreasonable-efforts failure based on visitation facts |
Key Cases Cited
- In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212 (Iowa 2016) (de novo review standard for TPR appeals with deference to juvenile court credibility findings)
- In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (scope of reasonable‑efforts requirement and its relation to termination burden)
- In re M.B., 553 N.W.2d 343 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996) (reasonable efforts must facilitate reunification while protecting child from harm)
- In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100 (Iowa 2014) (child’s right to permanency outweighs speculative future parental improvement)
- State v. Mann, 512 N.W.2d 528 (Iowa 1994) (recusal standards; judges should not recuse absent occasion for it)
- State v. Millsap, 704 N.W.2d 426 (Iowa 2005) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard for recusal rulings)
- In re A.A.G., 708 N.W.2d 85 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005) (parent must request additional services to preserve challenge to IDHS efforts)