Opinion
No. 2-121 / 01-1521.
Filed April 24, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, DANIEL BLOCK, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children. AFFIRMED.
Michael Lindeman of the Lindeman Law Firm, Cedar Rapids, for appellant-mother.
David Mason, Waterloo, for father of L.A.
Tomas Rodriquez, Waterloo, for father of B.A.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, M. Elise Pippin, Assistant Attorney General, and Steven Halbach, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Sharon Briner, Waterloo, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by MAHAN, P.J., and MILLER and HECHT, JJ.
A.A. appeals from the termination of her parental rights to Brenton and Lawrence. We affirm.
I. Factual Background and Proceedings.
A.A. is the biological mother of Brenton, born December 13, 1999, and Lawrence, born November 7, 2000. On August 21, 2000, the Department of Human Services (DHS) received a report alleging A.A. was using crack cocaine while pregnant with Lawrence and caring for Brenton. A hair stat test of Brenton's hair was positive for cocaine.
On September 20, 2000, DHS received a second report alleging A.A. left Brenton at home unattended. A.A. rejected a DHS suggestion that she should undergo inpatient treatment for cocaine addiction. Shortly thereafter, Brenton was removed from A.A.'s care and a CINA petition was filed. Following a temporary removal hearing on September 27, 2000, the juvenile court placed Brenton's custody with DHS and ordered A.A. to submit to a substance abuse evaluation and random urinalyses. Brenton was placed with her maternal grandparents. A.A. failed to consistently exercise visitation and receive services offered by DHS. The maternal grandmother was unable to care for Brenton, and she was removed from their home on October 17, 2000.
On October 24, 2000, A.A. entered a hospital after using cocaine. She presented with premature labor symptoms, but refused to take medication offered to assist in the development of her unborn child's lungs and left the hospital the next day against medical advice. On October 26, 2000, A.A. was involuntarily committed for five days of substance abuse treatment. After two days in the program, she stole two wallets and left the treatment program. On November 2, 2000, she was detained and transported to the University of Iowa Hospital for chemical dependency treatment. Lawrence was born during A.A.'s treatment at the University of Iowa. He tested positive for cocaine at birth and was diagnosed with pneumonia.
On November 30, 2000, both children were adjudicated children in need of assistance in Black Hawk County. A.A. was ordered to participate in family centered services, obtain an outpatient substance abuse evaluation, follow all drug treatment recommendations, and provide random urinalyses. During the ensuing sixty days, A.A. entered treatment programs at Covenant Hospital, Allen Hospital, and the University of Iowa Hospital, but failed to complete them because she refused to participate in therapy, departed against medical advice, and was discharged for violation of rules against drug use.
On February 12, 2001, A.A. pled guilty to theft in the second degree and received a deferred judgment. She was ordered to enter and successfully complete a drug treatment program in Fort Dodge and was released from jail. A.A. was again uncooperative in treatment and ran from the program on February 25, 2001. She returned to Black Hawk County, but failed to request a visit with the children until March 20, 2001.
A.A. was arrested on March 21, 2001, and her deferred judgment was revoked. Her sentence of incarceration was suspended; however, she was again ordered to successfully complete chemical dependency treatment. On May 15, 2001, she was placed in the MECCA drug treatment facility in Iowa City. A.A. was transferred to the program's Des Moines facility on May 22, 2001 after she violated rules prohibiting sexual relations with other residents. On May 25, 2001, she was discharged from the program for disciplinary reasons and left the facility before law enforcement officials arrived to pick her up.
On May 24, 2001, the State filed a petition for termination of A.A.'s and the children's fathers' parental rights. A.A. was apprehended on June 25, 2001. Her probation was revoked, and she was ordered to serve a sentence of five years. The hearing on the petition to terminate parental rights of the three parents was held on August 22, 2001. A.A. was incarcerated at Mitchellville at the time and did not attend. The juvenile court terminated A.A.'s rights pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(e), (h), and (l) (2001). The court also terminated the rights of both fathers. Only A.A. appeals.
Iowa Code section 232.116 was amended effective April 24, 2001. The district court referred to the prior code sections in his opinion.
II. Scope and Standards of Review.
The standard of review in termination cases is de novo. In re M.N.W., 577 N.W.2d 874, 875 (Iowa Ct.App. 1998). Accordingly, we review both the facts and the law and adjudicate rights anew. In re T.A.L., 505 N.W.2d 480, 482 (Iowa 1993). We give weight to the factual determinations of the juvenile court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but are not bound by them. Id. The grounds for termination must be proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re E.K., 568 N.W.2d 829, 831 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997). Our primary concern is the best interest of the child; we look to both the child's long-range and immediate interests. In re M.T., 613 N.W.2d 690, 691 (Iowa Ct.App. 2000).
III. Reasonable Efforts.
A.A. contends (1) she was not afforded a real opportunity to continue in a relationship with the children and (2) insufficient services were provided as she was seeking substance abuse treatment during the course of the CINA and termination proceedings. While the State has the obligation to provide reasonable reunification services, parents have an obligation to demand other, different, or additional services prior to the termination hearing if they believe the services offered are insufficient. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999). A parent's challenge to the sufficiency of services should be made when the services are offered or denied, not after the State seeks termination because services have failed to remedy parenting deficiencies. In re D.S., 563 N.W.2d 12, 15 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997); In re C.W., 522 N.W.2d 113, 117 (Iowa Ct.App. 1994). A.A. failed to challenge the reasonableness of services in the juvenile court, and therefore did not preserve error on this issue.
IV. Sufficiency of the Evidence to Support Termination.
A.A. asserts generally in the summary of her argument that the termination of her parental rights was not supported by sufficient evidence. She does not identify in any particular manner how the State's evidence is insufficient. Upon our de novo review, however, we find the juvenile court's decision is supported by overwhelming evidence. Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.