Opinion
No. 9-133 / 09-0050
Filed March 11, 2009
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Marshall County, Victor G. Lathrop, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child. AFFIRMED.
Darrell G. Meyer, Marshalltown, for appellant father.
Tomas Rodriguez and John Swain of the Public Defender's Office, Marshalltown, for appellee mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Jennifer Miller, County Attorney, and Joshua Vander Ploeg, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Bethany Currie, Marshalltown, for minor child.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Potterfield and Mansfield, JJ.
[EDITORS' NOTE: THE PUBLICATION STATUS OF THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. THE PRECEDENTIAL VALUE OF CASES WHICH ARE NOT YET PUBLISHED IS GOVERNED BY IOWA CT. R. 6.14 (5).]
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
A father appeals the juvenile court's termination of his parental rights to his child. The child was adjudicated a child in need of assistance on June 28, 2007, when she was almost two years old. The court allowed the child to remain with her mother in a substance abuse treatment program. In November 2007, after the mother left the program, the court placed the child with her father, Jesse. Jesse was to provide random drug screens, to complete substance abuse treatment, and to cooperate with mental health and in-home services.
The mother's parental rights are not at issue on appeal.
On March 13, 2008, the court placed the child in foster care. The child's care arrangement was altered because Jesse and the child tested positive for methamphetamine, and Jesse's test was also positive for THC. Jesse's whereabouts were unknown. He has not seen his child since.
On September 4, 2008, the court ordered custody of the child be transferred to the child's maternal great aunt and uncle. A petition for termination of parental rights was filed September 18, 2008, stating that Jesse's parental rights should be terminated pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e), (g), (h), and ( l) (2007). At the time of the hearing on the petition, the child was three years old. The juvenile court terminated Jesse's parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(e), (h), and ( l), finding that termination was in the child's best interests. Jesse appeals. II. Standard of Review
We review a termination of parental rights de novo. In re Z.H., 740 N.W.2d 648, 650-51 (Iowa Ct.App. 2007). Grounds for termination must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. In re J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 798 (Iowa 2006). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child. Id. III. Termination of Parental Rights
Though the juvenile court terminated Jesse's parental rights on three statutory grounds, we need only find that termination is appropriate on one ground to affirm. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999).
We agree with the juvenile court that clear and convincing evidence supported termination of Jesse's parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(e). This section provides that termination is appropriate when: (1) the child has been adjudicated a child in need of assistance; (2) the child has been removed from Jesse's physical custody for at least six consecutive months; and (3) there is clear and convincing evidence that Jesse has not "maintained significant and meaningful contact with the child during the previous six consecutive months and [has] made no reasonable efforts to resume care of the child despite being given opportunity to do so." Iowa Code § 232.116(e). Significant and meaningful contact is defined to include "the affirmative assumption by the parents of the duties encompassed by the role of being a parent," requiring a "continued interest in the child, a genuine effort to complete the responsibilities prescribed in the case permanency plan, a genuine effort to maintain communication with the child," and the parent's establishment and maintenance of a place of importance in the child's life. Id.
The first two elements of section 232.116(e) are not at dispute. As to the third element, Jesse argues that he made numerous requests for visits and made efforts to have guardianships established. The record establishes that Jesse has not made a genuine effort to fulfill his responsibilities under the case plan. He provided a sample for drug screening only three out of roughly twenty-five times that he was called on to provide a sample. All three samples provided tested positive for THC. He declined to attend substance abuse classes that were recommended after a substance abuse evaluation. He did not follow through with scheduled mental health appointments and did not refill necessary prescriptions. His in-home services were discontinued because the worker could not locate Jesse, who failed to cooperate with the services.
Jesse has not seen the child since removal in March 2008. The record shows that Jesse made only one attempt to see his child since her removal from his care in March 2008. In September 2008, Jesse asked to see the child, lying to the Iowa Department of Human Services about participating in a treatment program.
Jesse has not shown a consistent and continued interest in the child, and he has not made a genuine effort to maintain communication with his child. We agree with the juvenile court that it is in the child's best interests that Jesse's parental rights be terminated pursuant to section 232.116(e).
AFFIRMED.