Opinion
No. 6-205 / 06-0298
Filed April 12, 2006
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Martha M. McMinn, Sioux City, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas S. Mullin, County Attorney, and David Dawson, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
John Moeller, Sioux City, for the father.
Michelle Dreibelbeis, Juvenile Law Center, Sioux City, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered en banc.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Jesse and Blake are the parents of Oren, who was born in February 2005. Both parents have a history of mental illness. They also have a history of domestic violence. Oren was removed from Jesse's care in May 2005 after she was observed with Oren engaging in very bizarre behavior, and making rambling statements about unrelated events. Blake was in the hospital at that time due to a recent suicide attempt. Oren was placed in foster care.
Blake is the putative father of Oren; legal paternity has never been established.
Oren was adjudicated to be a child in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(b) (2005) (parent is imminently likely to neglect child), (c)(2) (child is likely to suffer harm due to parent's failure to supervise), and (n) (parent's mental condition results in child not receiving adequate care). Jesse participated in services, including therapy, counseling, skill development, and supervised visitation.
In December 2005, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate the parents' rights. Jesse's parental rights were terminated under sections 232.116(1)(d) (child CINA for neglect, circumstances continue despite the receipt of services), (e) (child CINA, removed for six months, parent has not maintained significant and meaningful contact), and (h) (child is three or younger, CINA, removed for at least six months, and cannot be safely returned home). Blake's parental rights were also terminated. The juvenile court found:
It is unlikely that either Jesse or Blake could become stable enough, mentally or financially, to parent Oren at any time in the foreseeable future. Neither Jesse nor Blake possess the ability to provide for their own needs, much less the needs of a small child. They have been unable to address and resolve the issues which led to Oren's removal.
Jesse appeals the termination of her parental rights.
II. Standard of Review
The scope of review in termination cases is de novo. In re R.E.F.K., 698 N.W.2d 147, 149 (Iowa 2005).
III. Reasonable Efforts
Jesse claims sufficient services were not provided in order to allow reunification with her child. Jesse has failed to present any supporting legal authority for her argument. "Failure in the brief to state, to argue or to cite authority in support of an issue may be deemed waiver of that issue." Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(1)( c).
Furthermore, while the State has an obligation to make reasonable efforts, a parent has the responsibility to demand services if they are not offered prior to the termination hearing. In re H.L.B.R., 567 N.W.2d 675, 679 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). Jesse does not state what different services should have been offered to her, and there is no evidence in the record that she demanded different services prior to the termination hearing. We conclude she has failed to preserve this issue for our review.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
AFFIRMED.
Sackett, C.J., concurs specially.
I concur specially.
Jesse suffers from mental illness. The social security administration has determined she is disabled and she receives benefits. She is stable when taking medication, but her mental illness deteriorates when she is off medication. Her doctor was of the opinion that she can provide a healthy and safe environment for her child "as long as her mental status remains stable."
The juvenile court found Jesse has a bond with her child and they enjoy each other's company. The juvenile court found Jesse had therapy and counseling, but made no specific finding that reasonable efforts to reunify the family or accommodate her disability were made. Jesse fails to show she raised the issue of reasonable efforts in the juvenile court or that she filed any additional motions asking the juvenile court to address it. Furthermore, her petition on appeal fails to address what services, if any, were requested and more importantly, what services are needed. She makes no claim that she is entitled to any type of accommodation because of her disability. I am not convinced that the services provided were directed to accommodating her disability and assisting her in reunifying her family. Yet the issues of accommodation and reasonable efforts are not preserved for our review, and I must agree with the decision to affirm.