Opinion
No. 3-470 / 03-0891
Filed July 10, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, L. Vern Robinson, Judge.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to her child. AFFIRMED.
Thomas O' Flaherty of O'Flaherty Law Firm, Swisher, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, Harold Denton, County Attorney, and Kelly Kaufman, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Judith Jennings Hoover, Marion, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Hecht and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Nanette H. appeals the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights to her daughter, Courtney W. She contends termination was not in her child's best interests. We affirm.
Nanette gave birth to Courtney on September 20, 1999, while she was incarcerated in a state prison facility. Courtney's father is deceased. He never had a meaningful relationship with his daughter.
Courtney came to the attention of the juvenile court on May 7, 2002, after her mother was arrested for several criminal offenses including operating while intoxicated and child endangerment. The record reveals Nanette attempted to elude authorities by driving 107 miles per hour while her daughter was a passenger in her car. Courtney tested positive for cocaine following her mother's arrest and was removed from Nanette's care. Courtney was adjudicated a child in need of assistance (CINA) on May 30, 2002. She has been in foster care ever since.
In January 2003 the State filed a petition to terminate Nanette's parental rights. The juvenile court terminated the mother's parental rights on May 7, 2003, under Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(b), (d), (e), and (h) (2003). Nanette appealed.
We review termination orders de novo . In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
Nanette does not contest the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under any of the grounds relied on by the juvenile court. Instead, she contends terminating her parental rights will not serve Courtney's best interests. She suggests the court should have placed her and her daughter in an appropriate residential facility so she could receive additional services. We disagree.
Even if the statutory requirements for termination are met, the decision to terminate must be in the best interests of the child. In re C.W., 554 N.W.2d 279, 282 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996). In assessing the best interests of Courtney, we must evaluate her long-range as well as immediate interests. See In re K.F., 437 N.W.2d 559, 560 (Iowa 1989). We consider what the future likely holds for Courtney if returned to Nanette's care. See id. We gain insight into Courtney's prospects by reviewing the evidence of Nanette's past performance for it may be indicative of her future capabilities. See In re M.S., 519 N.W.2d 398, 400 (Iowa 1994).
We find termination of Nanette's parental rights to be in Courtney's best interests. Nanette has an extensive criminal record and a lengthy history of drug abuse. She has served at least four prison terms for a variety of offenses. When the termination hearing was held, she was again in jail awaiting trial on a serious felony offense with little prospect for release in the immediate future. When Nanette is not incarcerated, she leads an unstable lifestyle characterized by the chronic abuse of controlled substances. As the juvenile court noted, the mother has received numerous services over a period of many years, including substance abuse counseling and treatment, from a number of different providers. Nanette has not benefited from past services, and it does not appear she would benefit from any additional services in the future. Nanette has provided little financial or emotional support for Courtney. Although Courtney is nearly four years old, Nanette has actually cared for her daughter for less than one complete year. She has had very little contact with her daughter since Courtney was removed from her care more than one year ago.
Courtney needs a safe, stable, and permanent home environment to give her a chance to grow up to be a successful adult. Nanette's past performance clearly demonstrates she is totally unable to provide that kind of environment. Courtney should not have to wait any longer for her mother to overcome her problems and become a responsible adult. Courtney clearly would not be safe if returned to her mother's care. We affirm the juvenile court's decision to terminate Nanette's parental rights.