Opinion
No. 3-992 / 03-1856.
Filed January 14, 2004.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John G. Mullen, District Associate Judge.
A father appeals from the order terminating the parental rights to his son and daughter. AFFIRMED.
Catherine Alexander of Zamora, Taylor, Clark, Alexander Woods, Davenport, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, William E. Davis, County Attorney, and Gerda Lane, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Jay Sommers, Davenport, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Hecht and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Michael Jr. is the father of Kaitlyn, who was born January 23, 1998, and Michael, III, who was born April 22, 1999. The children were first adjudicated to be in need of assistance on October 2. 2001 due to, among other things, their mother's refusal or inability to provide the appropriate care, supervision, and shelter and her failure to cooperate with services. Kaitlyn and Michael, III, were placed in foster care in early July 2001, and have remained in out-of-home placement ever since. On September 10, 2003, the children's guardian ad litem filed a petition to terminate the parental rights of the parents. At the time of the termination hearing, Michael Jr. was imprisoned in Illinois due to a probation revocation. Following that hearing, the court terminated Michael Jr.'s rights pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(d), 232.116(1)(f), and 232.117 (2003). Michael Jr. appeals.
The mother consented to the termination of her parental rights and she is not involved in this appeal.
While the juvenile court cited sections 232.116(1)(c) and (e) in its termination order, we believe it actually terminated under renumbered sections 232.116(1)(d) and (f) (2003).
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). While the district court terminated the parental rights on more than one statutory ground, we only need to find grounds to terminate parental rights under one of the sections cited by the district court in order to affirm its ruling. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995).
On appeal, Michael Jr.'s only contention is that the court erred in concluding reasonable efforts have been made to prevent or eliminate the need for removal of the children from his home. Michael Jr. does not cite in his petition when and how this contention has been preserved for our review. On our review of the record it does not appear that he requested different or additional services at any time prior to this appeal. Parents should demand services prior to the termination hearing. In re C.D., 508 N.W.2d 97, 101 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993). Challenges to services should be made when the case plan is entered. In re L.M.W., 518 N.W.2d 804, 807 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994). Micheal Jr.'s failure in this regard waives this issue on appeal. See In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999).
On our de novo review of the record, however, we find the numerous and varied services offered to Michael Jr. by service providers were adequate and appropriate. Michael Jr. made little effort to comply with the services that were offered, and he has not addressed the circumstances that led to the adjudicatory harm. Moreover, we conclude Michael Jr.'s parental rights are properly terminated under sections 232.116(1)(d) and (f). We therefore affirm the termination order.