In the Interest of A.F., Minor Child, S.A., Mother
This text of In the Interest of A.F., Minor Child, S.A., Mother (In the Interest of A.F., Minor Child, S.A., Mother) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 16-0119 Filed March 23, 2016
IN THE INTEREST OF A.F., Minor Child,
S.A., Mother, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Barbara H. Liesveld,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.
AFFIRMED.
Jessica L. Wiebrand, Cedar Rapids, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Janet L. Hoffman and Kathrine S.
Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee State.
Kimberly A. Opatz of Linn County Advocate, Cedar Rapids, for minor
child.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ. 2
VAITHESWARAN, Presiding Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in
2012. She contends (1) the State failed to meet its burden of proving the
grounds for termination cited by the district court and (2) termination was not in
the child’s best interests.
I. Grounds for Termination
The district court terminated the mother’s parental rights pursuant to two
statutory provisions. We may affirm if we find clear and convincing evidence to
support either ground. See In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999).
Our de novo review of the record reveals the following pertinent facts.
The mother began using drugs when she was twelve or thirteen years old and
continued to use them for most of the ensuing fifteen years. Initially, she
consumed alcohol and marijuana. Later, she added cocaine, opiates, and
methamphetamine.
The mother voluntarily terminated her parental rights to two older children
based in part on her substance abuse. The child who is the subject of this action
tested positive for methamphetamine at birth. The mother consented to his
removal. She subsequently underwent inpatient drug treatment at a facility that
allowed her to have the child with her. Following treatment, the child was
formally returned to her care.
Several months later, the mother relapsed and the child was removed
from her care. The State filed a petition to terminate her parental rights but the
mother progressed with treatment and the district court dismissed the petition. 3
The court again returned the child to the mother’s care. Shortly thereafter,
the mother failed to comply with a department request for a drug test. She later
admitted she had relapsed on methamphetamine around the time of the
requested test.
Three months passed. The mother eventually submitted to a drug test in
March 2015. The result was positive for methamphetamine. The child also
tested positive for methamphetamine and was removed from the mother’s care.
The mother continued to struggle with sobriety. She admitted to using
drugs from March 2015 into June 2015. In September 2015—the same month
as the termination hearing—a drug patch tested positive for methamphetamine.
The mother expressed surprise at this result and laid the blame on certain
medication she was taking. However, the test result separately showed the
presence of methamphetamine in addition to the amphetamines arguably derived
from her medicine.
Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2015) requires proof of several
elements, including proof the child cannot be returned to a parent’s custody.
Although the mother lived in rent-free subsidized housing and stated she had a
bed and toys for the child, the primary impediment to reunification was not her
housing but her drug use. Commendably, the mother was attending treatment at
the time of the termination hearing. But the mother previously participated in
inpatient and outpatient drug treatment, without success.
We conclude the child could not be returned to the mother’s custody. We
affirm the district court’s termination of the mother parental rights pursuant to
Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h). 4
II. Best Interests
Termination must be in the best interests of the child. See In re P.L., 778
N.W.2d 33, 39-40 (Iowa 2010). The mother was afforded multiple opportunities
to reunify with the child. Each time, she returned to drug use. As the guardian
ad litem reported, she “has not demonstrated in the three years this case has
been open that she can maintain sobriety.”
The mother’s drug use jeopardized the child’s health and safety. The
department social worker assigned to the case cited the recent positive drug test
on the child. In addition, a professional explained that the child was traumatized
by the multiple removals and placements during his forty months of life, causing
him to act out in foster care.
Despite her return to drug use, the mother insists the district court should
have afforded her six additional months to work toward reunification. See Iowa
Code § 232.104(2)(b). In our view, the court showed extraordinary patience with
the mother. On our de novo review, we see no basis for a further extension.
We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to this child.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of A.F., Minor Child, S.A., Mother, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-af-minor-child-sa-mother-iowactapp-2016.