In the Interest of D.W. and G.W., Minor Children
This text of In the Interest of D.W. and G.W., Minor Children (In the Interest of D.W. and G.W., 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. 25-0728 Filed September 4, 2025
IN THE INTEREST OF D.W. and G.W., Minor Children,
B.B., Mother, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, Judge.
The mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to two children.
AFFIRMED.
Teresa M. Pope of Pope Law, PLLC, Des Moines, for appellant mother.
Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Mackenzie Moran, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee State.
Jami J. Hagemeier of Youth Law Center, Des Moines, attorney and
guardian ad litem for appellee minor children.
Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Greer and Buller, JJ. 2
GREER, Judge.
The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights to G.W. (born in
2019) and D.W. (born in 2023) pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and
(h) (2024), respectively.1 The mother appeals, arguing (1) the Iowa Department of
Health and Human Services failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify her with
the children; (2) the State did not prove the statutory grounds for termination
because the children could have been returned to her custody at the time of the
termination trial; (3) alternatively, she should be given more time to work toward
reunification; (4) termination of her parental rights is not in the children’s best
interests; and (5) the juvenile court should have applied a permissive exception to
save the parent-child relationships.
As the mother recognized during her testimony at the termination trial, G.W.
and D.W. could not be returned to her custody because they could not live with her
at the sober living home where she resided. Plus, the mother had not achieved
long-term sobriety or shown that she could be successful outside of a structured
residential program. Giving the mother more time to work toward reunification is
not in G.W.’s or D.W.’s best interests, especially when we consider the trauma the
juvenile court described that impacted her relationship with G.W. and safety
concerns related to both children. Both children were legally removed from
parental custody for more than two years before the end of the termination trial in
February 2025. By then, G.W. generally did not want to attend visits with the
mother, and D.W.—who was removed at birth—had never lived with the mother.
1 The father’s parental rights were also terminated; he does not appeal. 3
Neither child should have to wait longer for a safe, permanent home. See In re
J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 801 (Iowa 2006) (Cady, J., concurring specially) (“A child’s
safety and need for a permanent home are now the primary concerns when
determining a child’s best interests.”).
Using de novo review, see id. at 798, we carefully examined the record, the
briefs of the parties, and the juvenile court’s lengthy, fact-intensive, and thorough
ruling. We approve of the reasons and conclusions in the termination order and
determine a full opinion would not augment or clarify existing case law. See Iowa
Ct. R. 21.26(1)(d), (e). We affirm without further opinion.
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 D.W. and G.W., Minor Children, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-dw-and-gw-minor-children-iowactapp-2025.