From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re B.K

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Jun 15, 2005
705 N.W.2d 106 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-463 / 05-0666

Filed June 15, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Jane C. Mylrea, Associate Juvenile Judge.

A mother appeals a juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. AFFIRMED.

David Baumgartner, Strawberry Point, for appellant mother.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Fred H. McCaw, County Attorney, and Jean Becker, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.

Christopher Soppe of Blair Fitzsimmons, P.C., Dubuque, for father.

Mary Kelley, Dubuque, guardian ad litem for minor child.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Huitink and Vaitheswaran, JJ.


I. Background Facts Proceedings

Christine and Shaun are the parents of Brianna, born in August 2002. Christine was hospitalized for mental illness in January 2004, and she voluntarily placed Brianna in foster care. The mother was previously hospitalized in 2003, and at that time she placed Brianna with the paternal grandmother, Mary Jo. Christine has been diagnosed with bipolar and borderline personality disorders. There are also concerns that Christine abuses alcohol.

A joint adjudication/disposition order was entered on April 27, 2004. Brianna was adjudicated to be a child in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(n) (2003) (parent's mental condition results in child not receiving adequate care). Christine participated in family-centered services and mental health services.

Christine made good progress in dealing with her mental health issues. On September 13, 2004, the juvenile court ordered that Brianna could be returned to her care. This progress was short-lived, however, and Christine was again hospitalized for mental illness in October 2004. Brianna was placed with Mary Jo and her husband. Christine was civilly committed for inpatient mental health treatment. While on a day pass from the mental health facility, Christine was arrested for operating while intoxicated.

In December 2004 the State filed a petition seeking termination of the parents' rights. Shaun agreed to the termination of his rights. The juvenile court terminated Christine's parental rights pursuant to section 232.116(1)(h) (child is three or younger, CINA, removed for at least six months, and cannot be returned home). The juvenile court found

Unfortunately, in this case, this is not the first time the child has been removed due to the mother's serious mental illness. This child has been back and forth to foster care and relative placement due to a pattern of behavior whereby the mother's bipolar disorder with psychotic features and borderline personality disorder presents in such a manner that she is unable to provide care for the child due to her delusional system. She then requires hospitalization. She often goes off her meds and admits that she does and ends up in the hospital. . . .

The court found Brianna needed stability and that termination of Christine's parental rights was in her best interests. Christine 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. Best Interests

Christine asserts termination of her parental rights is not in Brianna's best interests. Under section 232.116(3), the juvenile court need not terminate parental rights under certain circumstances, including (c), "termination would be detrimental to the child at the time due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship," and (e) "[t]he absence of the parent is due to the parent's admission or commitment to any institution, hospital, or health facility. . . ." Christine asserts the juvenile court should have refused to terminate her parental rights under these circumstances.

The juvenile court did not address this issue. When a ruling fails to address an issue properly submitted, a party must file a post-trial motion to preserve error, such as a motion pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.904(2). See In re A.M.H., 516 N.W.2d 867, 872 (Iowa 1994); In re N.W.E., 564 N.W.2d 451, 455 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). We do not address issues raised for the first time on appeal. In re C.D., 508 N.W.2d 97, 100 (Iowa Ct.App. 1993). We conclude Christine has failed to preserve this issue for our review.

Christine also asserts that it would be in Brianna's best interests to give her more time to achieve reunification with her daughter. It is unnecessary to take from a child's future any more than is demanded by statute. In re C.K., 558 N.W.2d 170, 175 (Iowa 1997). Patience with parents can soon translate into intolerable hardship for a child. Id. We agree with the juvenile court's assessment that in this case there was a significant, established pattern of Christine needing to be hospitalized for her mental health problems, and resulting instability for Brianna. We conclude termination of Christine's parental rights is in Brianna's best interests.

We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

In re B.K

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Jun 15, 2005
705 N.W.2d 106 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

In re B.K

Case Details

Full title:IN THE INTEREST OF B.K., Minor Child, C.O., Mother, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Jun 15, 2005

Citations

705 N.W.2d 106 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)