In the Interst of D.W., D.W., and D.W., Minor Children, D.W., Father
17-1112
| Iowa Ct. App. | Sep 13, 2017Background
- DHS became involved after prior child-abuse assessments and reports in 2013 and confirmed parental methamphetamine use in 2015; two older children were adjudicated CINA but remained with father until 2016 when all three children were removed after a relapse.
- Case plan required substance-abuse treatment, drug testing, mental-health treatment, protective child care, and visitation; father did not consistently attend visits and visitation location/transportation issues arose.
- Father repeatedly used methamphetamine, failed to complete treatment, avoided/failed drug tests (including shaving body hair), and committed domestic violence during the case (including setting the mother’s clothes and children’s belongings on fire), resulting in incarceration.
- DHS provided services (including gas cards and consideration of in-home visits) but declined to transport father to visits because of safety concerns given his erratic and violent behavior; the juvenile court found DHS made reasonable efforts.
- The juvenile court terminated father’s parental rights under Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(e)–(h); on appeal the court affirmed termination under § 232.116(1)(f) and (h), finding children could not be returned and termination served their best interests.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DHS made reasonable efforts to reunify | DHS failed to increase visitation and provide transportation assistance | DHS provided reasonable efforts (gas cards, offered in-home visits; refused transport for worker safety) | DHS made reasonable efforts; father’s claim denied |
| Whether evidence supported termination under § 232.116(1)(e)-(h) | Insufficient evidence to terminate rights | Father’s continued substance use, violence, incarceration, noncompliance show inability to parent | Termination supported; affirmed under § 232.116(1)(f) and (h) |
| Whether additional time for reunification was required | Father sought more time, asserting progress on case plan | Father had not completed treatment, remained violent, missed visits, avoided testing; more time would not resolve concerns | Court denied additional time; patience not unlimited |
| Whether the parent-child bond precluded termination (§ 232.116(3) exception) | Strong emotional bond with children should save relationship | Father’s failures (substance use, violence, nonparticipation) outweigh bond; stability favors termination | Exception not applied; termination affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa 2010) (scope of review in termination cases is de novo)
- In re J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793 (Iowa 2006) (grounds for termination require clear and convincing evidence)
- In re J.B.L., 844 N.W.2d 703 (Iowa Ct. App. 2014) (affirmance requires showing termination appropriate under any one statutory ground)
- In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489 (Iowa 2000) (courts must afford parents a full measure of patience when remedying deficiencies)
- In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33 (Iowa 2010) (best-interests analysis gives primary consideration to safety and long-term nurturing placement)