In the Interest of C.P. and K.P., Minor Children, S.M., Mother
This text of In the Interest of C.P. and K.P., Minor Children, S.M., Mother (In the Interest of C.P. and K.P., Minor Children, S.M., 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. 15-0635 Filed July 9, 2015
IN THE INTEREST OF C.P. AND K.P., Minor Children,
S.M., Mother, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Cheryl Traum,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children
born in 2009 and 2010. AFFIRMED.
Charles Elles, Bettendorf, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, Michael J. Walton, County Attorney, and Julie Walton,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Jack Dusthimer, Davenport, attorney and guardian ad litem for minor
children.
Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Doyle, JJ. 2
VAITHESWARAN, J.
An incarcerated mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to
two children, born in 2009 and 2010. She does not challenge the grounds for
termination. She simply argues the district court (1) should have “granted
additional time for [her] to be released on parole and work on her reunification
with the children” and (2) termination “was not in the children’s best interest.”
Our de novo review of the record reveals the following facts. The children
were removed from the parents’ care based on the parents’ abuse of alcohol and
marijuana while caring for them. Meanwhile, the mother pled guilty to two counts
of child endangerment involving other children, was sentenced to two
consecutive prison terms not exceeding five years each, and remained in prison
at the time of the termination hearing.
Although the mother testified parole was imminent, her counselor
recommended against parole until she completed a nine-month substance abuse
program. At the time of a rescheduled termination hearing, the Iowa Board of
Parole had yet to receive the mother’s papers and the mother could only
speculate on what action the board would take.
We agree with the district court that the children were in need of
permanency and should not have to wait “while their parent attempts to put [her]
life in order.” Accordingly, additional time for reunification was not warranted.
See Iowa Code § 232.104(2)(b) (2013).
Termination also must be in the children’s best interests. In re P.L., 778
N.W.2d. 33, 40 (Iowa 2010). An Iowa Department of Human Services social
worker acknowledged the mother shared a close bond with the children. The 3
mother additionally pointed to eight certificates she received for completing
rehabilitative programs within the prison. Nonetheless, her substance abuse and
anger issues and her propensity to associate with men having similar issues lead
us to conclude termination was in the children’s best interest.
AFFIRMED.
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 C.P. and K.P., Minor Children, S.M., Mother, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-cp-and-kp-minor-children-sm-mother-iowactapp-2015.