Opinion
No. 6-201 / 06-0200
Filed March 29, 2006
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel L. Block, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her three children. AFFIRMED.
Delmer D. Werner, Cedar Rapids, for appellant-mother.
Kathryn Mahoney, Waterloo, for appellee-father. Mark Milder, Cedar Falls, for appellee-father.
Daniel Dudden, Webster City, pro se.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Katherine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Ferguson, County Attorney, and Steven Halbach, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
David Zellhoefer of Zellhoefer Law Office, Waterloo, for minor child.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Eisenhauer, JJ.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to Taylor, born in 1997, Skylar, born in 2000, and Alexander, born in 2003. She contends that the State did not prove the grounds for termination cited by the district court. On our de novo review, we disagree.
The children were removed from the mother's custody after the Department of Human Services found that the mother physically abused Taylor and failed to supervise properly the younger two children.
Following their removal, the mother participated in reunification services, but did so unwillingly and, sometimes, belligerently. A service provider testified that therapy and skill development sessions were "not always productive." She explained that development of the mother's parenting skills was "slow and minimal" and "it would be too easy for [the mother] to slip back into her old patterns and old behaviors."
As for visitation, the mother only exercised supervised visits with her children. Six months before the termination hearing, her sessions with Taylor were curtailed because Taylor expressed fear of her mother. The Department continued to afford the mother visitation with her younger two children and her interaction with those children improved over time. However, one of the social workers who supervised visits questioned the mother's willingness to change her parenting style. She stated, "whenever we try to teach her anything, she doesn't need to learn it."
A Department employee testified that this attitude was a reflection of the mother's poor mental health. She noted that the mother had a problem with anger management and was "very easily agitated, unpredictable, paranoid."
We recognize that the mother made some strides in addressing mental health issues. At the time of the dispositional review hearing in mid-2005, the juvenile court found that the mother did not follow through with mental health counseling and did not take prescribed mental health medications. By the time of the termination hearing, a service provider testified that the mother was attending mental health treatment sessions. In addition, she was taking prescribed medication. However, her belated interest in mental health services raises doubts about her level of commitment. As an evaluating psychologist stated in early 2005, "[t]hough she may accept therapy in its early stages, her attitude towards treatment may be short-lived and fragile. If there is any hope that this woman will ever mature and become capable of protecting and nurturing her children she must adhere to her psychiatric and psychotherapeutic regimens."
There was also evidence that the mother's living conditions did not allow for reunification. A service provider testified that, in the six months preceding the hearing, the mother had "lost her trailer" and was "living with other people." A Department employee testified, "I have no clue where [the mother] is living."
Finally, the statutory time frames for removal prior to termination had long since expired. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 495 (Iowa 2000) (stating statutory time frames preceding termination must be viewed with sense of urgency). A Department employee stated that termination was warranted because Taylor had been out of her mother's care for forty-five months and the younger two children for sixteen months. She continued, "I do not think that [the mother], if given another three or even six months, could make enough change where these kids could return home in a safe, nurturing home."
There was an interim period of reunification that was unsuccessful.
Based on this record, we agree with the district court that the children could not be returned to the mother's custody. See Iowa Code §§ 232.116(1)(f) and (h) (2005). We find it unnecessary to address the remaining arguments raised by the mother. See In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 911 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996) (stating we may affirm if there is clear and convincing evidence to support any of the grounds for termination cited by the district court).
We affirm the termination of the mother's parental rights to Taylor, Skylar, and Alexander.