Opinion
No. 5-806 / 05-1308
Filed November 9, 2005
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Constance Cohen, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to three of her minor children. AFFIRMED.
Robert Wright, Jr. of Wright Wright, Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Celene Coffman, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Kimberly Ayotte of the Youth Law Center, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Theda and Guillermo are the parents of Dorothea, born in 1991; Samuel, born in 1993; Lesa, born in 1995; and Daniel, born in 1997. The children were removed from Theda's care in December 2003 because the children were suffering neglect due to Theda's mental health problems. Theda shaved the children's heads, made increasingly erratic statements, and contemplated suicide. The children were placed in foster care.
Guillermo has not been part of the children's lives for several years and is not a party to this appeal.
The children were adjudicated to be children in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) (2003) (children are likely to suffer harm due to parent's failure to supervise) and (n) (parent's mental condition results in children not receiving adequate care). Theda was ordered to have a psychosocial evaluation and participate in individual therapy. The children also attended individual therapy.
Theda consistently behaved erratically and made inappropriate comments during supervised visitation. Her behavior caused the children extreme emotional distress. Theda's visits were suspended in September 2004. Although Theda participated in individual therapy, she was resistant to taking medication, and her mental health problems continued.
In December 2004 the State filed a petition seeking termination of the parents' rights. The juvenile court terminated Theda's parental rights to Samuel, Lesa, and Daniel under section 232.116(1)(f) (2005) (children four or older, CINA, removed for at least twelve months, and cannot be returned home). The court found it was not in Dorothea's best interests to terminate Theda's parental rights because Dorothea was nearly fourteen years old and was adamantly opposed to the termination. Dorothea remained in foster care. The court determined it was in the best interests of the other three children to terminate Theda's parental rights. The court noted that due to her untreated mental illness, Theda continued to cause her children emotional and physical harm. Theda appeals.
II. Standard of Review
The scope of review in termination cases is de novo. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). The grounds for termination must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re T.B., 604 N.W.2d 660, 661 (Iowa 2000). Our primary concern is the best interests of the children. In re J.L.W., 570 N.W.2d 778, 780 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997).
III. Reasonable Efforts
Theda contends the State did not engage in reasonable efforts to reunite her with the children. At a permanency hearing on December 13, 2004, Theda requested that visitation with the children be reinstated. The juvenile court ruled that the issue of visitation would be considered at a pretrial conference on December 17, 2004. At the pre-trial conference, however, Theda withdrew her request for visitation.
Reasonable services must be provided to attempt to reunite a family before the State can terminate parental rights. In re L.M.W., 518 N.W.2d 804, 807 (Iowa Ct.App. 1994). Reasonable efforts include a visitation arrangement designed to facilitate reunification while protecting the children from the harm responsible for the removal. In re M.B., 553 N.W.2d 343, 345 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996). The nature and extent of visitation is controlled by the best interests of the children. Id.
Because Theda withdrew her request for visitation, we believe she did not preserve error on this issue. See id. (noting a parent has the responsibility to object to services prior to the termination hearing). If this issue had been preserved, we would still find that the services offered in this case were reasonable. Visitation was suspended because Theda's conduct was causing the children distress. It was not in the children's best interests to continue visitation.
IV. Sufficiency of the Evidence
Theda contends there was insufficient evidence in the record to show the children could not be returned to her care at the time of the termination hearing. She asserts that her mental health problems "were well within normal limits" and contends she would be able to care for the children.
There is clear and convincing evidence in the record to show that Theda had serious mental health problems. A parent's mental disability, standing alone, is not a sufficient reason to terminate parental rights. In re J.W.D., 456 N.W.2d 214, 218 (Iowa 1990); In re J.P., 499 N.W.2d 334, 337 (Iowa Ct.App. 1993). It is a proper factor to consider, however, in determining whether a parent is able to effectively function as a parent. In re T.T., 541 N.W.2d 552, 556 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995). Here, Theda's persistent and unresolved mental health problems have caused the children extreme emotional distress. As the juvenile court noted, these children have suffered emotional and physical harm over a period of many years because of their mother's behavior. The record reveals no realistic basis for concluding that Theda will ever be able to make the changes necessary to safely nurture her children. We conclude there is ample evidence in the record to show that the children could not be safely returned to Theda's care without exposing them to great risk of further adjudicatory harm.
V. Best Interests
Theda claims it is not in the best interests of Samuel, Lesa, and Daniel to terminate her parental rights. She points out that the court found it was not in Dorothea's best interests to terminate her parental rights.
While the juvenile court found that termination of Theda's parental rights was not in Dorothea's best interests, it does not necessarily follow that termination of her parental rights was not in the best interests of the other children. Dorothea was older, and her therapist advised that it would be detrimental to her to terminate her relationship with her mother at this point in time. As noted above, it was clear that contact with Theda was harmful to the other children. We conclude termination of Theda's parental rights was in the best interests of Samuel, Lesa, and Daniel.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.