Opinion
No. 5-465 / 05-0665
Filed June 15, 2005
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, William S. Owens, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her five minor children. AFFIRMED.
Mary Baird Krafka of Krafka Law Office, Ottumwa, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, and Mark Tremmel, County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Philip Ferren of Ferren Law Office, Ottumwa, for father.
Sam K. Erhardt of Erhardt Erhardt, Ottumwa, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Mahan and Zimmer, JJ.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Paul and Juana are the parents of Cristian, born in 1997; Diana, born in 1998; Alexis, born in 2000; Maria, born in 2001; and Jennifer, born in 2002. The family came to the attention of the Iowa Department of Human Services in September 2003, when the parents brought Alexis to the hospital for injuries to his genitals. Alexis reported Paul had kicked him with a boot. Social workers discovered all of the children showed signs of physical abuse and neglect. The children were removed from the home and placed in foster care.
The parents are undocumented immigrants. Diana and Jennifer were born in the United States. The juvenile court entered an order providing that Cristian, Alexis, and Maria were eligible for special immigrant juvenile status.
The parents were arrested on child endangerment charges. Because of their status as illegal immigrants, they could not bond out of jail. Paul entered an Alford plea and was sentenced to prison. He is expected to be released in 2006, and then most likely would be deported. The charges against Juana were eventually dismissed, and she was released from jail in August 2004.
In the meantime, the juvenile court determined the children were in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(b) (2003) (parent has physically abused child) and (c)(2) (child is likely to suffer harm due to parent's failure to supervise). The Department provided the parents with parent skill development services and supervised visits while they were in jail.
Juana has not demonstrated the ability to successfully supervise all five children. The children have special needs. Cristian and Alexis have been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Diana and Maria have been diagnosed with an adjustment disorder. Jennifer sometimes displays aggressive behavior. Also of concern is the fact that Juana never offered any explanation for the children's scars and injuries.
In October 2004 the State filed a petition seeking termination of the parents' rights. The juvenile court terminated Juana's parental rights pursuant to sections 232.116(1)(f) (child four or older, CINA, removed for at least twelve months, and cannot be returned home) (Cristian, Diana, and Alexis), and (h) (child is three or younger, CINA, removed for at least six months, and cannot be returned home) (Maria and Jennifer). The court noted that despite the receipt of services, Juana lacked the parental skills necessary to parent five children. The court was also concerned that Juana would reunite with Paul when he was released from prison. Paul's parental rights were also terminated.
The juvenile court also cited to § 232.116(1)(b) (abandonment). The termination petition did not seek termination on this ground, but instead cited to § 232.116(1)(d) (circumstances continue despite the receipt of services).
Juana asked to have the children placed with her relatives. The relatives already have six children of their own, and a home study did not recommend placing the children with them. The juvenile court determined the children should not be placed with these relatives. Juana appeals.
II. Standard of Review
The scope of review in termination cases is de novo. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). The grounds for termination must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re T.B., 604 N.W.2d 660, 661 (Iowa 2000). Our primary concern is the best interests of the children. In re J.L.W., 570 N.W.2d 778, 780 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997).
III. Sufficiency of the Evidence
Juana claims there is insufficient evidence in the record to support termination of her parental rights. She asserts that she was totally dependent upon Paul due to her limited education and inability to speak English. She states she was afraid to speak out against his abuse of the children.
We find there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of Juana's parental rights. We look to a parent's past performance, because it may indicate the quality of care the parent is capable of providing in the future. In re C.K., 558 N.W.2d 170, 172 (Iowa 1997). In the past, Juana failed to protect the children from physical abuse. There was no evidence Juana has now become independent of Paul. The children cannot be placed with Juana due to the possibility that she could reunite with Paul, thus further endangering the children. In addition, Juana has not shown an ability to successfully parent these five children.
IV. Best Interests
Juana contends it is not in the children's best interests to terminate her parental rights. She asserts that at least Diana and Maria could be placed with her relatives, and that the other children could be gradually integrated into the home.
We agree with the juvenile court's decision to reject placement of the children with Juana's relatives. There was a question about the relatives' commitment to the children. At one time they stated they only wanted the two children who had been born in the United States, Diana and Jennifer. The relatives also expressed concerns about the children's behavioral problems. We note the home study did not recommend placing the children with these relatives.
V. Additional Time
Juana asked for additional time to get herself stabilized. It is unnecessary to take from a child's future any more than is demanded by statute. C.K., 558 N.W.2d at 175. Patience with parents can soon translate into intolerable hardship for a child. Id. We adopt the juvenile court's findings on this issue:
Juana also requested that she be provided with additional time to have the children returned to her. These children have been removed since September 2003, and she is no closer to having the children returned to her now than when they were first removed. The evidence is clear and convincing that while additional time may be in Juana's best interests, it would be contrary to the welfare of the children, and would only serve to postpone the permanency that they desperately need.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court terminating Juana's parental rights to her five minor children.