Opinion
No. 2-103 / 01-1036.
Filed March 27, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, KARLA J. FULTZ, Associate Juvenile Judge.
Stephanie M. appeals the termination of her parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Karen Taylor of the Law Offices of Taylor Ristau, Des Moines, for appellant-mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Jennifer Navis, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Barbara Romar, Des Moines, for minor child.
Considered by HUITINK, P.J., and VOGEL and EISENHAUER, JJ.
Stephanie M. appeals the termination of her parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(c) (child adjudicated CINA for sexual abuse or neglect, circumstances continue despite the receipt of services), (e) (child four or older adjudicated CINA, removed from home for twelve of last eighteen months, and cannot be returned home), and (k) (1999) (child adjudicated CINA, parent has substance abuse problem, child cannot be returned within a reasonable time). We affirm.
Stephanie does not challenge the sufficiency of the State's evidence, but instead argues more time was needed to accomplish reunification with her children. She claims injuries sustained in a house fire and a difficult pregnancy rendered her physically unable to comply with the mandates of the court's dispositional order. Stephanie also argues that the district court erred in terminating her parental rights based on continued alcohol abuse, citing her successful completion of a treatment program and inadequate time to demonstrate sobriety. The gist of Stephanie's argument is the department of human services failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify her family unit.
Even if we were to read Stephanie's argument as a challenge to the sufficiency of the State's evidence, it would be deemed waived because no authority to support the argument was stated, argued, or cited in her brief. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(1)(e); Kachevas, Inc. v. State, 524 N.W.2d 450, 452 (Iowa Ct.App. 1994).
There is no indication Stephanie raised the department's failure to make reasonable reunification efforts prior to the termination hearing. We accordingly find error on this issue was not preserved for our review. See In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999) (parent has obligation to challenge reasonableness of services prior to the termination hearing). Even if we were to find otherwise, we believe the district court properly terminated Stephanie's parental rights.
Stephanie's children are in need of a stable, permanent home, and there is little to indicate she is capable of accomplishing those objectives. Stephanie suffers from serious depression. She and the children have been victims of domestic violence. At trial, Stephanie testified concerning her three-month relationship with a man over the Internet. Although she has never met this person, Stephanie intends to live with him. In her therapist's opinion, Stephanie fails to recognize how her lifestyle adversely affects her children. The therapist also testified that Stephanie lacks the emotional stability to appropriately and effectively parent her children. She further opined that Stephanie has reached "maximum benefit" from therapy and would likely not change her lifestyle despite the resulting risk to her children.
We also conclude, based on these factors, that termination of her parental rights is in her children's best interests. "The crucial days of childhood cannot be suspended while parents experiment with ways to face up to their own problems." In re A.C., 415 N.W.2d 609, 613 (Iowa 1987). Our supreme court has been emphatic that after the statutory limit of twelve months, the case must be reviewed with a sense of urgency. In re R.J., 436 N.W.2d 630, 636 (Iowa 1989). "This period must be reasonably limited because patience on behalf of the parent can quickly translate into intolerable hardship for the children." Id. Stephanie's children should not be forced to wait any longer while she attempts to create a stable home. See In re D.A., 506 N.W.2d 478, 479 (Iowa Ct.App. 1993).
The district court decision is affirmed in its entirety.
AFFIRMED.