Opinion
No. 6-038 / 05-1737
Filed February 1, 2006
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Carol L. Coppola, District Associate Judge.
A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Amanda M. Demichelis of Bull Law Office, P.C., Des Moines for appellant-M.E. mother. Jesse A. Macro, Jr., Des Moines, for appellant-M.E. father.
Chira Corwin of Marberry Law Firm, Des Moines, for appellee-maternal grandmother.
Ryan Ellis, Indianola, for appellee-B.C. father.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Katherine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Jennifer Galloway, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Charles Fuson, Youth Law Center, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for children A.A., H.A., and A.E.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Mick and Michelle are the married parents of Alex, born in 1998. Michelle is also the mother of Amanda, born in 1994, and Haley, born in 1996. Both parents are long-term users of illegal substances, including methamphetamine and cocaine.
In 2004, the children were removed from Mick and Michelle and were placed in foster care. The State eventually petitioned to terminate the parents' rights to their children on several grounds, one of which required proof that the children could not be returned to their custody. See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f) (2003). At the termination hearing, both parents essentially conceded that this ground applied. The district court terminated their parental rights and this appeal followed.
On appeal, the parents contend termination was not in the children's best interests. See In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). Reviewing the record de novo, we disagree.
Michelle testified she used cocaine approximately one month before the termination hearing and methamphetamine three to four months before the hearing. She was in a relapse prevention program at the time. She admitted that, between 2003 and 2004, she regularly used both drugs, notwithstanding her participation in substance-abuse recovery programs.
Michelle did not have contact with the children for approximately eight months preceding the termination hearing. She asked the court to delay termination by six months "to establish a residence and to find good jobs" and "stay off drugs," but she conceded she had already been given a year to accomplish these goals.
Mick had a similar history of drug abuse. He testified he had been using cocaine and methamphetamine with his wife for approximately eight to nine years. He also admitted using methamphetamine with her approximately three months preceding the termination hearing. When asked about the extent of his drug use, he stated the longest he had been off drugs in the previous year was approximately a month and a half.
Like Michelle, Mick agreed he did not follow through with substance-abuse recovery programs. Like Michelle, he also agreed he had no contact with his son for approximately eight months preceding the termination hearing. He sought a three-month delay of termination because he believed he was on a "better road to recovery right now," but he admitted he had not "demonstrated it yet."
There is no question that the drug addictions of Michelle and Mick adversely affected the children. A clinical social worker testified that Alex "was having a lot of behavioral difficulties." She noted he was "very very close to his father and to his mother, and when that removal occurred it was very difficult on him." She stated he "wants to return to them" but she opined "the bond with his family is unhealthy."
As for the girls, the social worker testified they had come to an understanding "that they are not going back there." She stated, "basically the girls want everything to be over with because they're tired of waiting and not having an answer about where they're going to grow up."
We conclude termination of these parents' rights to their respective children was in the children's best interests. Accordingly, we affirm.