In the Interest of S.R. and M.R., Minor Children, T.E., Father
16-1362
| Iowa Ct. App. | Oct 26, 2016Background
- Father has long DHS involvement dating to 2010 for unsafe, unsanitary home and his own mental-health and self-care deficits; two younger children’s parental rights previously terminated and affirmed.
- Children at issue: S.R. (born 2008) and M.R. (born 2000); DHS provided services intermittently for several years.
- Father showed short-term improvements but demonstrated ongoing anger/volatility, substance abuse, and inconsistent participation in treatment and drug testing.
- After a 2016 arrest for methamphetamine/paraphernalia, father was evicted and failed to allow DHS to inspect a roommate in his new apartment or consent to background checks.
- DHS maintained supervised visits; father sought increased visitation but DHS limited visits after incidents where workers feared for safety and a child was threatened.
- Juvenile court terminated father’s parental rights under Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f) and (g); father appealed arguing insufficient reasonable efforts and insufficient proof of grounds for termination. Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS made reasonable efforts to reunify | DHS failed to increase visitation despite repeated requests; DHS never intended reunification | DHS provided services, adjusted visits when father improved, and limited visits when safety concerns arose | Affirmed: DHS met reasonable-efforts requirement; restrictions were justified by safety concerns |
| Whether statutory grounds for termination were proved under § 232.116(1)(f) (child cannot be returned) | Children could be immediately returned to father’s care | Father has chronic substance abuse, volatility, and unstable improvements; supervised visits remained necessary; return would risk harm | Affirmed: clear and convincing evidence supports termination under (f) |
| Applicability of statutory exceptions to termination under § 232.116(3) | Exceptions (unspecified) should apply to avoid termination | No statutory exceptions applied on the facts | Affirmed: no exceptions applied |
| Whether other statutory ground (§ 232.116(1)(g)) required separate analysis | Father challenged proof under (g) | Court may affirm on any proven ground; (f) establishes sufficiency | Affirmed via (f); separate (g) analysis unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100 (Iowa 2014) (standard of de novo review and weight to juvenile court findings in termination appeals)
- In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (reasonable-efforts requirement and its relation to burden of proof)
- In re T.S., 868 N.W.2d 425 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015) (affirmance may rest on any statutory ground supported by evidence)
- In re T.B., 604 N.W.2d 660 (Iowa 2000) (future parenting capacity may be inferred from past performance)
- In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (three-step analysis for termination: grounds, best interests, exceptions)