From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re G.L

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 12, 2005
707 N.W.2d 336 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-693 / 05-1267

Filed October 12, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Nancy S. Tabor, Judge.

A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two daughters. AFFIRMED.

Jean Wahlen, Davenport, for appellant-mother.

Thomas Miller, Attorney General, and Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, William E. Davis, County Attorney, and Gerda Lane, Assistant County Attorney, for Appellee.

Marsha Arnold and John Moeller, Davenport, attorneys for the father.

Patricia Zamora of Zamora, Taylor, Woods, Alexander Frederick, Davenport, attorney for intervenor.

Lawrence Lammers of McCarthy, Lammers Hines, Davenport, guardian ad litem for the children.

Considered by Zimmer, P.J., and Hecht and Vaitheswaran, JJ.


Shawn appeals the termination of her parental rights to Gabby and Kali, born in 1994 and 1995 respectively. We affirm.

I. Background Facts and Proceedings

Gabby and Kali, as well as their two older brothers, were removed from Shawn's care in 1995 based on her incarceration for a drug-related offense. All four were placed in the care of Shawn's father and his wife. At the time of the removal, Kali was an infant and Gabby a toddler.

Kali was born with crack cocaine in her system.

Shawn was released from prison in February 1998. She married a man she met in prison and had another child. Eventually, all involved agreed to the return of her two oldest children to her care. Gabby and Kali continued to live with their grandfather and his wife.

In 2004, when Gabby was ten and Kali nine, Shawn's father petitioned to terminate his daughter's parental rights to these children. Following a contested termination hearing, the district court granted the petition.

On appeal, Shawn contends the record lacks clear and convincing evidence to support the grounds for termination cited by the district court. See Iowa Code §§ 232.116(1)(d) (requiring proof of several elements including proof that circumstances leading to adjudication continue to exist despite offer or receipt of services); 232.116(1)(e) (requiring proof of several elements including proof that parents have not maintained significant and meaningful contact with child during previous six months) (2003). On our de novo review, we find it necessary to address only one of those grounds. In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 911 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996).

II. Absence of Significant and Meaningful Contact

The phrase "significant and meaningful contact" includes but is not limited to "the affirmative assumption by the parents of the duties encompassed by the role of being a parent." Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(e). Shawn contends that she attempted to assume her parental duties but her father stymied her efforts.

The district court found otherwise, citing the minimal number of telephone contacts Shawn made with the girls, the absence of documentary evidence supporting any telephone contacts with the children in 2004 and 2005, her decision to relocate to Des Moines while the children remained with her father in Illinois, and her refusal to support the children financially. The record supports these findings.

The termination hearing began in mid-2005. A case manager with the Department of Human Services testified he did not believe Shawn visited Gabby and Kali at any time after Christmas of 2004. Shawn's father confirmed this testimony, stating Shawn had two visits with the children in July 2004 and one on Christmas, 2004. He stated she called on Easter Sunday, 2005, but had not called since then. He testified:

These girls do not know their mother. They've had — she's had very little involvement with these girls. They've never bonded with her. She's had every opportunity. I've never denied her any visitation at or any time spent with them. She can call on the phone any time. . . .

Shawn confirmed key parts of this testimony. She admitted she did not visit the children between July and Christmas, 2004. Her stated reason was "I didn't have a vehicle that would get me out of town, and I started a new job." While she testified she called the children "four or five times" between July 2004 and Christmas 2004 and "probably six or seven times" after Christmas 2004, she introduced no phone records to document these calls, as she had done for previous years.

She testified, "It was easy to keep up with my phone records when I had a cell phone, and I no longer have a cell phone because it's not affordable since my family has grown." It was pointed out, however, that several members of her family had cell phones in those years.

It is clear from the record that Shawn allowed her father and his wife of twenty-six years to raise and nurture Gabby and Kali for close to a decade. She did so despite the fact that she was out of prison for seven of those years. In light of this record, we agree with the district court that the few phone calls and even fewer visits she made were neither significant nor meaningful.

In reaching this conclusion, we have consideredthe discrepancies in the testimony of Shawn and her father concerning the precise number of phone calls and visits she made. Even if we were to accept Shawn's version in its entirety, we would have to conclude the level of contact she had with Gabby and Kali did not reflect an affirmative assumption of parental duties. See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(e). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's termination of Shawn's parental rights to Gabby and Kali.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

In re G.L

Court of Appeals of Iowa
Oct 12, 2005
707 N.W.2d 336 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)
Case details for

In re G.L

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF G.L. and K.L., Minor Children, S.W. Mother, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Oct 12, 2005

Citations

707 N.W.2d 336 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)