In the Interest of K.P., Minor Child, K.S., Mother
17-0576
| Iowa Ct. App. | Jun 21, 2017Background
- Child K.P., born 2016, tested positive for methadone, opiates, and codeine at birth and required treatment for withdrawal; removed from mother K.S. July 8, 2016.
- Parents have longstanding substance-abuse histories; mother’s parental rights to three older children were previously involuntarily terminated.
- K.P. adjudicated CINA (child in need of assistance); juvenile court waived reasonable efforts due to parental noncooperation with treatment and testing.
- Mother inconsistently engaged in mental-health therapy, failed to attend recommended intensive outpatient substance-abuse treatment, and missed random drug tests despite methadone treatment.
- State petitioned to terminate parental rights; juvenile court terminated mother under multiple grounds including Iowa Code §232.116(1)(g) and found termination was in child’s best interests. Mother appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency to terminate parental rights | State: Clear and convincing evidence supports termination under multiple statutory grounds, including §232.116(1)(g). | K.S.: Record lacks sufficient evidence to support termination. | Court: Affirmed; termination supported under §232.116(1)(g). |
| Application of §232.116(1)(g) (prior terminations & inability to respond to services) | State: Mother had prior involuntary terminations and continues to lack ability/willingness to benefit from services; additional rehabilitation would not correct situation. | K.S.: Argued she could rehabilitate and parent if given more time. | Court: Mother’s prior terminations, persistent substance abuse, and treatment history show clear and convincing evidence she won’t respond to services; additional time would not help. |
| Best interests of the child | State: Termination promotes child’s need for stability and permanent home. | K.S.: Placement with maternal grandfather (guardianship) would be a suitable less-restrictive alternative. | Court: Child’s need for permanence and mother’s limited progress support termination as serving best interests. |
| Availability of guardianship as alternative | State: Relative placement does not override statutory determination when termination grounds exist. | K.S.: Guardianship with grandfather would avoid termination and preserve relationship. | Court: Court may decline guardianship when termination grounds and child’s best interests support severing parental rights. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (de novo review standard for termination appeals)
- In re J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793 (Iowa 2006) (clear and convincing evidence required to terminate)
- In re D.D., 653 N.W.2d 359 (Iowa 2002) (meaning of clear and convincing evidence)
- In re L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 1990) (child’s best interests paramount in termination proceedings)
- In re J.B.L., 844 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa Ct. App. 2014) (affirmance requires only one statutory ground)
- In re N.F., 579 N.W.2d 338 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998) (parent’s treatment history relevant to likelihood of future sobriety and parenting)
- In re L.M.F., 490 N.W.2d 66 (Iowa Ct. App. 1992) (legislature deems termination promotes child’s needs when statutory grounds exist)
- In re C.K., 558 N.W.2d 170 (Iowa 1997) (relative willingness to care for child does not override child’s best interests when termination is appropriate)