In the Interest of K.J., Minor Child, T.B., Father, J.J., Mother
16-1329
| Iowa Ct. App. | Nov 9, 2016Background
- Child (two years old) adjudicated CINA on Oct. 5, 2015 and removed after an altercation in which the child was struck; child’s hair tested positive for amphetamines/methamphetamine.
- Child has been out of mother’s custody for over eleven months at time of appeal; parents received services but failed to correct underlying problems.
- Mother has unresolved substance abuse and mental-health issues, missed 28 drug screens, tested positive on multiple screens, lacks stable housing and employment, has not progressed beyond supervised visits.
- Father made minimal participation: appeared only at temporary-removal hearing, did not engage in services, last supervised visit in Dec. 2015, made no contact after release from jail shortly before termination hearing.
- Juvenile court terminated both parents’ rights on multiple statutory grounds; appeals by both parents challenged sufficiency of evidence supporting termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient evidence to terminate mother under Iowa Code §232.116(1)(h) (child ≤3 adjudicated CINA and out of custody ≥6 months cannot be returned) | Mother: insufficient evidence that child cannot be returned now | State/guardian: mother’s ongoing substance abuse, missed tests, unstable housing/employment, and lack of progress make return unsafe | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supports termination under §232.116(1)(h) |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence to terminate father for abandonment under §232.116(1)(b) | Father: insufficient evidence of abandonment | State/guardian: father abandoned child by failing to parent, engage in proceedings or services, and failing to contact child after release from jail | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence of abandonment under §232.116(1)(b) |
| Whether termination is in child’s best interest and whether any permissive statutory factor weighs against termination | Parents: termination not in child’s best interest; more time should be given | State/guardian: parents’ prolonged noncompliance, criminality, unstable housing, mental-health/substance issues, and lack of bond counsel for permanency | Affirmed: termination is in child’s best interest; no permissive factor bars termination |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.B., 554 N.W.2d 291 (Iowa Ct. App.) (defining abandonment and parental responsibilities)
- In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764 (Iowa 2012) (best-interest analysis and consideration of statutory factors)
- In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (urgency after limitation period lapses)
- In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63 (Iowa Ct. App.) (affirming termination if any cited statutory ground is supported)