Opinion
No. 3-355 / 03-0533.
Filed May 29, 2003.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, KARLA J. FULTZ, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights to her daughter. AFFIRMED.
David Pargulski, Des Moines, for appellant-mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Faye Jenkins, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Kimberly Ayotte, Des Moines, for child.
Considered by SACKETT, C.J., and HUITINK and VOGEL, JJ.
Jennifer is the mother of Rocio, born April 8, 2002. Jennifer has been involved with the Department of Human Services (DHS) since she was seven years old due to her mental health issues. In January 2002, she had her rights terminated to a prior child. Jennifer was homeless and sought assistance during her pregnancy with Rocio. The child was removed from Jennifer's custody three days after her birth. On June 5, 2002, the juvenile court adjudicated Rocio to be in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2), 232.2(6)(n) and 232.96 (2001). Following a hearing on the State's petition, the court terminated Jennifer's parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(b), 232.116(1)(d), 232.116(1)(e), 232.116(1)(g), and 232.116(1)(h) (2003). Jennifer appeals this order.
We review termination orders de novo. In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern in termination proceedings 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 will affirm if at least one ground has been proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995).
On appeal, Jennifer asserts that termination is not in Rocio's best interests and that clear and convincing evidence does not support the termination order. As noted, Rocio was adjudicated CINA in June of 2002 due to Jennifer's lengthy history of mental illness and substance abuse. Jennifer was offered a wide variety of services including DHS supervision, foster care, substance abuse treatment, Golden Circle and Westminster House services, supervised visits with Rocio, drug screenings, psychosocial evaluation, and parent skill training. Despite the receipt of these services, Jennifer's progress was minimal, leaving significant concerns regarding her ability to safely and adequately parent Rocio. Among those obstacles to reunification are her lack of ability to adequately care for the child and failure to provide Rocio with a stable environment.
As late as July 16, 2002, the date of the dispositional order, Jennifer's psychiatrist, Richard Nightengale, M.D., confirmed a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder. Jennifer enjoyed the supervised visits with Rocio when she was happy and healthy but would become overwhelmed and end the visits early if Rocio was not feeling well. Jennifer was unable to retain the parenting skills from one visit to the next and required assistance when performing basic tasks, such as changing Rocio's diaper. Jennifer has never had unsupervised visits with her daughter. In July 2002, Jennifer claimed to have been exposed to tuberculosis. The visitation supervisor, Renee Keith, (Keith), informed Jennifer visits would not resume until she was tested but instructed her as to where she could be tested that very week. Instead, Jennifer waited a month to be tested resulting in a lapse of her visitations. During one of the visits, Keith suggested Jennifer seek therapy for anger management. Jennifer responded by yelling and swearing at Keith and attended only one individual therapy session a week or two before the termination hearing. In addition, Jennifer failed to participate in drug screening as required by DHS.
The evidence demonstrates circumstances which led to CINA adjudication continue to exist despite the offer and receipt of services. See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(d)(2). Based on these and other concerns founded in the record we also conclude termination is in Rocio's best interests, and therefore affirm the termination.
In order to support a termination under this provision, the State must establish the child was adjudicated CINA for physical or sexual abuse or neglect and circumstances continue despite the receipt of services.