In the Interest of A.S. and M.S., Minor Children
This text of In the Interest of A.S. and M.S., Minor Children (In the Interest of A.S. and M.S., Minor Children) 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. 21-1106 Filed November 23, 2021
IN THE INTEREST OF A.S. and M.S., Minor Children,
T.S., Father, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Paul G. Crawford,
District Associate Judge.
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children.
AFFIRMED.
Christopher A. Clausen of Clausen Law Office, Ames, for appellant father.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Ellen Ramsey-Kacena, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.
Mary Cowdrey of Public Defender’s Office, Marshalltown, attorney and
guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Tabor and May, JJ. 2
VAITHESWARAN, Presiding Judge.
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children, born
in 2018 and 2019.1 He does not challenge the ground for termination cited by the
district court. See Iowa Code section 232.116(h) (2021) (requiring proof of several
elements including proof the children could not be returned to parental custody).
He focuses on “the children’s bond with [him] developed through contacts while he
has been incarcerated and his substantial progress toward release from prison.”
The father’s argument implicates a permissive exception to termination based on
the closeness of the parent-child relationship. See id. § 232.116(3)(c); In re A.S.,
906 N.W.2d 467, 475 (Iowa 2018).
The father was imprisoned before the younger child was born and when the
older child was just eighteen months old. He acknowledges he “was incarcerated
when this case began and is still incarcerated.” Commendably, he called the
children from prison “every day.” He also had “a video visit[] with” them. The father
developed a bond with the children through these contacts and the bond was
reciprocated by the older child, who addressed him as “Daddy” and seemed
excited to participate in the calls. Understandably, there is scant evidence that the
younger child recognized or interacted with the father in the same way. See In re
A.B., 957 N.W.2d 280, 301 (Iowa 2021) (noting that child was “quite young” and
“had less time to form a bond”). That said, there is no question the father made
concerted efforts to develop a relationship with both children.
1The mother’s parental rights were also terminated, but she did not file a notice of appeal. 3
Notwithstanding the evidence of attachment, the father conceded he would
be unable to care for the children in prison, on release to a halfway house, or
immediately upon release from the halfway house. The department of human
services case manager testified those milestones would not be reached until the
spring of 2022 in a best case scenario. She opined that the father’s parental rights
“need[ed] to be terminated because he [was] not available to” the children. On our
de novo review, we agree.
We affirm the district court’s denial of the permissive exception to
termination set forth in section 232.116(3)(c) and the termination of the father’s
parental rights to the children.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of A.S. and M.S., Minor Children, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-as-and-ms-minor-children-iowactapp-2021.