Opinion
No. 2-730 / 01-1933.
Filed February 28, 2003.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Joe Smith, District Associate Judge.
A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights to their two children . AFFIRMED.
Lori Holm, Des Moines, for appellant-mother.
Pamela Vandel, Des Moines, for appellant-father.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Jennifer Navis, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Michael Sorci, Des Moines, for minor child.
Considered by Habhab, Harris, and Snell, Senior Judges.
Senior Judges assigned by order pursuant to Iowa Code section 602.9206 (2003).
This case concerns the termination of parental rights of R.M. (father) and T.W. (mother) to their two daughters, C.M. and S.M. C.M. was born on July 16, 1998; S.M. on August 17, 1999. The parents are not married to each other. Termination was ordered pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(c) and 232.116(1)(g) (2001).
The mother's parental rights were also terminated to five other children. That decision has been appealed separately from the adjudication here. Although not the subject of this appeal, the general circumstances of their home life with their mother and R.M. bears on our decision here.
Another child of C.M., Heather, was born with significant medical problems. While in the care of her mother she received inadequate feeding and medical treatment. She was hospitalized and later released to her mother's care. While in that care she was scalded by her maternal grandmother and died as a result. The grandmother was convicted of child endangerment and incarcerated.
Two other children were the subject of child in need of assistance petitions because of limited parental skills and refusal of services. A fourth child was removed from the mother, placed with the Department of Human Services and later returned to the mother. A fifth child was born on October 1, 1993. In 1994 and 1995, the mother had two children stillborn. Between 1990 and 1994 there were six founded child abuse reports involving these children and one confirmed but not registered report.
In 1996 another child was born. On July 6, 1997, another child was born but only lived six minutes. In February 1998, a child abuse investigation was conducted with respect to the child, Jeremy. His mother, T.W. was then living with her boyfriend, R.M., the subjects herein and her mother, in a trailer. Later, they moved to Kentucky.
The Kentucky authorities filed a petition against R.M. for physical abuse of Jeremy. Many concerns for the children's protection were raised by Kentucky authorities. On September 14, 1998, Kentucky ordered the removal of all the children. Before adjudication in Kentucky, the family moved back to Iowa.
On November 18, 1998, child in need of assistance petitions were filed by the Iowa authorities for C.M. and her siblings. The juvenile court found as petitioned, however, leaving the children with their mother and R.M. Family services were provided but the family was overwhelmed by the need for special services for the four older children. The child S.M. was born August 17, 1999.
The overall history of the care of all of these children shows neglect, lack of understanding of needs, incapability of the mother and R.M. to provide for the children and frequent danger to their survival. Among these concerns are injury to a child while being bathed (other than the child scalded), constant smoking around S.M. who has a serious respiratory condition, ignoring court no contact orders regarding the maternal grandmother, confirmed child abuse reports on January 18, March 12, and April 3 of year 2000. A removal order was entered and a child in need of assistance petition was filed for S.M. Later C.M. and S.M. were placed in temporary custody with their maternal grandfather and step-grandmother. A report thereafter showed that these two children were doing well in their new home.
Meanwhile, the situation in their mother's home was bad. After years of services, T.W. and R.M. were deemed marginally adequate in their parental care. Reports of domestic abuse of the children were frequent.
In February 2001, another child abuse report was made. This was based on the fact that the parents were allowing a person with child endangerment charges to live in their garage and baby-sit the children. In March 2001, a confirmed allegation was made that one child had been sexually abused by his brothers and their friends. Allegations were made that one of the children's friends had sexually abused his sister. A female child was hospitalized for having suicidal ideations. This came from the chaos and disruptions in the home. Another child was admitted to foster care upon the strong recommendations of a psychiatrist.
The present petition to termination parental rights on behalf of C.M. and S.M. was filed in May 2001. The case report stated that their people were concerned that these children would be harmed if in their parent's care.
These children's mother was not attending scheduled therapy and continued to blame the children's problems on the Department of Human Services.
The record shows a bonding of these two children with their maternal grandfather and step-grandmother. All of the therapists recommended that the children not be returned home.
Our review of this case is de novo. In re Dameron, 306 N.W.2d 743, 745 (Iowa 1981). We give weight to the findings of the juvenile court. In re L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489, 493 (Iowa 1990).
Trying to separate his situation from that of T.W., the children's father, R.M., argues that he is now separated from T.W. and there are no grounds to terminate his rights. However, we give the separation fact little weight as it occurred only three days before the termination hearing.
R.M. has been involved with the family since 1998. Kentucky founded a physical abuse charge on him and filed a petition on Jeremy's behalf. Later, he was named as the perpetrator of abuse on three reports. His discipline of the children has been inappropriate. He did not understand why one of the children needed to be in a sexual perpetrator program. His visits with the girls in their grandparents' custody have been infrequent. He did not call or write to them.
The juvenile court believed there has been no change in the parent's ability to properly parent these children. The court stated: "If the children were returned to their parents' custody, I have no doubt further harm would befall them."
Our primary concern in a termination proceeding is the best interests of the child. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 275 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995). Termination is in their best interests when there is sufficient evidence to prove any of the statutory grounds for termination. In re L.M.F., 490 N.W.2d 66, 68 (Iowa Ct.App. 1992). We require the State to prove the statutory grounds have been met by clear and convincing evidence. Iowa Code § 232.116(1) and 232.117(2)(3); In re T.A.L., 505 N.W.2d 480, 481 (Iowa 1993). The State has met its burden of proof regarding both T.W. and R.M. We find and order that the parental rights of T.W. and R.M. in their children C.M. and S.M. are terminated.
The trial court correctly decided this case and is affirmed.