Opinion
No. 3-981 / 03-0917.
Filed January 14, 2004.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Cerro Gordo County, Gerald W. Magee, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals from a juvenile court ruling entered following a review hearing in a child in need of assistance proceeding. AFFIRMED.
Ronald Arispe, Clear Lake, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney General, and Paul Martin, County Attorney, for appellee.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Zimmer and Miller, JJ.
A mother appeals from a ruling entered by the juvenile court, after a review hearing in a child in need of assistance (CINA) proceeding, which placed her daughter at the Iowa Juvenile Home. She contends her daughter should have been returned to her care. She also contends the court should have granted her motion to dismiss the CINA proceedings. We affirm the juvenile court.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Jodi is the mother of Jenni, born January 18, 1987. Jenni is a difficult and troubled child. She has a psychiatric diagnosis of oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, parent/child relationship problems, and antisocial and narcissistic personality traits. She has engaged in violent behavior, stolen a car, and posted inappropriate photos of herself on the Internet.
Jenni has an extensive history with the Department of Human Services (DHS) dating back to 1999. She has had multiple shelter placements, multiple residential placements, inpatient evaluation, detention placements, and family foster care. She has also been placed with relatives. Jenni has been returned to her mother's care on at least eight occasions without success. Jenni actively resists authority, making treatment during placement difficult.
In January 2002, Jodi approached the DHS about an out-of-home placement for Jenni. As a result, the State then sought to adjudicate Jenni as a child in need of assistance. The day after the CINA petition was filed the juvenile court ordered shelter care for Jenni, because "she and her mother have [a] conflictual, aggressive relationship." On February 15, 2002, the court adjudicated Jenni as a CINA. The court ordered that Jenni continue her placement in shelter care, a placement with which all parties agreed.
Unfortunately, Jenni's behavior did not improve. After a modification hearing in May 2002, the juvenile court made the following observations:
[Jenni] and her mother have a long history with the Department and with this Court. It is apparent that Jodi tries, but is not able to parent this difficult child, whose behaviors and antisocial attitudes mirror those of her mother. Their relationship is one of constant crisis and conflict from which they repeatedly seek temporary State intervention. Once again they each ask to end State intervention on [Jenni's] common plea for "one more chance" and on Jodi's unrealistic hope and belief that this time [Jenni] will "obey the rules." Unfortunately, however, neither of them have made any changes or seek any further services that would enhance another return home. . . .
[Jenni] has been assaultive. [Jenni] has been promiscuous. [Jenni] has destroyed property. [Jenni] has stolen property. [Jenni] has run away and disappeared for several weeks and therefore placed herself at great risk for physical and other harm. Her mother is not able to parent her and turns to the State to provide structure, discipline and consistency followed by her and [Jenni's] opposition to the same. Their dysfunctional relationship has not permitted them to live together (with few exceptions) more than a few days at a time.
This Court must act in [Jenni's] best interests — those interests are paramount and controlling. If her mother cannot, the State has the duty to provide treatment for [Jenni] for her mental health diagnosis and also to keep her safe from her own actions. To again dismiss this matter and return her home will further delay that needed protection — perhaps and until it is too late.
The juvenile court then ordered Jenni's placement in the Iowa Juvenile Home.
In an order entered January 6, 2003, the court ordered Jenni to remain at the Iowa Juvenile Home pending her placement in a therapeutic foster home. The court also rejected Jodi's request for custody. Jodi challenged the juvenile court's rulings on appeal without success.
In re J.L., 670 N.W.2d 432 (Iowa Ct. App. 2003).
The record reveals that Jenni left the Iowa Juvenile Home and began a therapeutic foster home placement on February 6, 2003. Sadly, Jenni soon regressed to her old ways. The foster parents requested Jenni's removal after her behavior "increased to an uncontrollable and unmanageable level." The DHS removed Jenni from the foster home and temporarily placed her at a youth shelter, from which she ran away. After a review and modification hearing on May 14, 2003, the court entered an order on May 20, 2003, which required that Jenni be returned to the Iowa Juvenile Home. Jodi has appealed from that order.
Authorities located Jenni and placed her in shelter care just before the court issued its review order.
II. Scope of Review
Our review of an action arising from CINA proceedings is de novo. In re B.B., 598 N.W.2d 312, 315 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999). We give weight to the fact findings of the juvenile court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but we are not bound by these findings. In re D.S., 563 N.W.2d 12, 14 (Iowa Ct. App. 1997). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child. In re E.H. III, 578 N.W.2d 243, 248 (Iowa 1998).
III. Discussion
Jodi first claims that the State failed to make reasonable efforts to reunite her with her daughter. Reasonable services must be offered to preserve the family unit and to eliminate the need for removal. In re L.M.W., 518 N.W.2d 804, 807 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994). The juvenile court made the following findings in its May 20, 2003, order:
[T]he State has made reasonable efforts to avoid out of home placement, to accomplish reunification, and to allow [Jenni] to safely return home, to wit: multiple shelter placements, four residential placements, three detention placements, two foster family placements, two Iowa Juvenile Home placements, non-relative custodian placement, placement with grandparents, previous CINA proceedings, delinquency proceedings, family centered services, individual counseling, substance abuse evaluation, and multiple unsuccessful placements at her mother's home.
Upon our de novo review, we conclude that the DHS has made reasonable efforts to reunite Jenni with her mother.
Jodi next claims the juvenile court erred in refusing her request to dismiss the CINA proceedings. We disagree. We review the denial of a motion to dismiss for errors at law. In re L.F., 590 N.W.2d 284, 285 (Iowa Ct. App. 1998). Pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.103 (2001) a juvenile court may only terminate a dispositional order and release a child upon a finding that "the purposes of the order have been accomplished and the child is no longer in need of supervision, care or treatment." See In re K.N., 625 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa 2001).
The juvenile court found that "the purposes of the Dispositional Orders herein have not been met and this child does remain in need of supervision, care and treatment." The record before us on appeal amply supports the court's decision not to dismiss the CINA proceedings. After Jenni was placed in therapeutic foster care, she engaged in a broad range of unacceptable behavior at home and at school which demonstrates that she requires further supervision, care and treatment. Therefore, we reject this assignment of error.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.