Opinion
No. 3-313 / 03-0539
Filed May 14, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mills County, Gary K. Anderson, District Associate Judge.
R.R. appeals from the termination of his parental rights to K.L.Q. AFFIRMED.
Josiah Wearin of Stamets Wearin, P.C., Red Oak, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, C. Kenneth Whitacre, County Attorney, and Marci Prier, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
William Rickabaugh, Tabor, for mother.
William McGinn, Council Bluffs, for minor child.
Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Miller and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Randy is the father of Katie, born in August 1995. The child was removed from the care of the mother, Pam, in May 1996. Randy, who lives in Kansas, was not involved in Katie's life until July 1999, when he began visitation. In January 2002 the juvenile court determined Katie refused to acknowledge Randy and Pam as her parents. The court ordered no further visitation unless recommended by the child's therapist.
The State sought to terminate the parents' rights. The juvenile court terminated Randy's parental rights under Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(e) and (f) (2003). Regarding Randy, the juvenile court found:
[T]he child has no bond with him, refuses any bond with him and it is not in the child's best interest to be placed with him, nor could the child be placed with him within a reasonably short period of time, if ever, and it is in the child's best interests that his parental rights be terminated.
Randy appeals the termination of his parental rights.
I. The scope of review in termination cases is de novo. In re J.L.W., 570 N.W.2d 778, 780 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). The grounds for termination must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999).
II. Randy claims the State did not engage in reasonable efforts to reunite him with his child. He asserts the juvenile court improperly restricted his visitation with Katie.
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). Generally, the Department of Human Services must make reasonable efforts to provide services to eliminate the need for removal. In re T.C., 522 N.W.2d 106, 108 (Iowa Ct.App. 1994). The reasonable efforts concept would broadly include a visitation arrangement designed to facilitate reunification while protecting the child 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 child. Id.
Under the facts of this case, we find the State acted reasonably in not offering Randy further visitation. Pam presented evidence that she informed Randy that he was going to be a father during her pregnancy. Randy testified he was unaware of Katie's existence until she was three or four years old. The juvenile court found Pam more credible on this issue, and we give deference to the court's findings. See Iowa R.App.P. 6.14(6)( g). Thus, despite knowledge of Katie, Randy took no action to place himself in a position to be able to care for her or be a part of her life. Katie did not know Randy and was not bonded with him. During visitation, Katie refused any direct interaction with Randy. Katie became "increasingly angry, upset and threatened by being made to visit with her biological parents, even in a therapeutic setting." We find there is clear and convincing evidence to show further visitation was not in Katie's best interests.
III. Randy claims it is not in Katie's best interests to terminate his parental rights. Even if the statutory requirements for termination of parental rights are met, the decision to terminate must still be in the best interests of the child. In re M.S., 519 N.W.2d 398, 400 (Iowa 1994).
We find termination of Randy's parental rights is in Katie's best interests. The record clearly shows Katie had no bond with Randy. For many years, Randy expressed no interest in his child. Katie has had very little contact with Randy throughout her life. The limited contact she did have was emotionally traumatic for her.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.