Opinion
No. 3-574 / 03-1061
Filed August 13, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, John G. Mullen, District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her children. AFFIRMED.
Neva Rettig Baker, Muscatine, for appellant-mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Katherine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Gary Allison, County Attorney, and Korie L. Shippe, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Doug Johnson, Muscatine, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Mahan and Zimmer, JJ.
Robyn R. appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights to her two children. Robyn is the mother of J.A., born July 31, 1996, and S.R., born January 25, 1999. Joseph A. is J.A.'s father and Donald F. is S.R.'s father.
The Department of Human Services (Department) began working with Robyn on a voluntary basis in the fall of 1999 while she and her children were living in a shelter in Muscatine. In January 2000 the State filed a petition alleging the children were in need of assistance. Robyn agreed the children should be removed from her care and placed with family friends who were in the process of becoming licensed foster parents. The juvenile court adjudicated J.A. and S.R. as children in need of assistance on March 31, 2000, and approved the agreed upon out-of-home placement. The adjudication was based on the mother's inability to provide appropriate care, supervision, medical care, safe shelter, and nutrition for the children despite the offer of services.
Robyn made some progress after the children were removed from her home, and the children were returned to her care in January of 2001. Unfortunately, soon after the children were returned home, Robyn again began having problems meeting the children's basic needs. The record reveals the family moved a number of times because of Robyn's inability or failure to pay rent. Her food stamps were canceled when she failed to comply with requirements for receiving benefits. Robyn also failed to properly supervise the children. On one occasion, S.R., then two-and-one-half years old, fell out of a second story window when he and J.A. were left playing without appropriate supervision. On another occasion, the boys were placed in the care of an aunt they did not know after Robyn was arrested on an outstanding warrant for driving under suspension. The Department also became aware that Robyn had begun living with Floyd G. during the summer of 2000. Her paramour was thought to be a risk to the children because of child abuse allegations regarding his own children. In an order filed December 24, 2001, the juvenile court ordered the children removed from Robyn's home and placed them in foster care. The court found Robyn had failed to keep her home in sanitary condition, and that she had ignored the medical and educational needs of the children. The court also found Robyn's commitment to services had diminished.
Floyd G. has been married and divorced three times. He has two children by his first marriage but no parental rights. He had two known child abuse reports filed against him prior to moving in with Robyn. One report was founded for physical abuse of his son, and the other was unfounded for sexual abuse of a four-year-old neighbor girl.
On January 18, 2003, the State petitioned to terminate
Robyn's parental rights to her children. The children's guardian ad litem and the Court Appointed Special Advocate Volunteer recommended termination of the mother's parental rights. Following a contested hearing, the court terminated Robyn's parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (Supp. 2001) on June 2, 2003. The court also terminated Donald F.'s parental rights to S.R. The court transferred guardianship and custody of J.A. to his father Joseph. Robyn appealed.
We review termination orders de novo . In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern is the best interests of the children. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
In order to terminate a parent's rights under section 232.116(1)(f) the State must establish that (1) the child is four years of age or older, (2) the child is in need of assistance, (3) the child has been removed for twelve of the last eighteen months or for the last twelve consecutive months, and (4) the child cannot be returned home. Robyn does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the first three elements of the statute. Instead, she contends the children could safely be returned to her home. We disagree.
Despite receiving numerous services during the past several years, Robyn is unable to consistently provide a safe environment for her children. She is also unable or unwilling to meet the children's medical and educational needs. Robyn has demonstrated she is unable to determine appropriate caretakers for the children. She still lacks the basic skills necessary to parent her children without significant outside intervention. Robyn is also resistant to change. She has never been willing or able to accept responsibility for the circumstances that led to placement of the children in foster care. The record reveals she blames others, including her children, for her circumstances. She is often volatile and angry. Robyn has never sought individual mental health counseling to address her interpersonal and dependency issues.
In determining the immediate and long-term best interests of the children, we consider what the future likely holds if they are returned to Robyn. See In re J.W.D., 458 N.W.2d 8, 10 (Iowa Ct.App. 1990). "Insight for that determination is to be gained from evidence of the parents' past performance for that performance may be indicative of the quality of future care the parents are capable of providing." In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 913 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996).
While the law requires a "full measure of patience with troubled parents who attempt to remedy a lack of parenting skills," this patience has been built into the statutory scheme of chapter 232. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 494 (Iowa 2000). Children should not be forced to endlessly await the maturity of a natural parent. Id. At some point, the rights and needs of the children rise above the rights and needs of the parent. In re J.L.W., 570 N.W.2d 778, 781 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997).
Upon our de novo review of the record, we conclude clear and convincing evidence supports the juvenile court's decision to terminate the Robyn's parental rights. We further conclude termination is in the children's best interests.
The mother also contends termination of her parental rights to J.A. was unnecessary because the juvenile court did not terminate the parental rights of J.A.'s father. We conclude error was not preserved on this issue. The termination order does not address this issue and we find no indication in the record that the mother raised this issue before the trial court. Accordingly, we deem the issue waived. Even if error had been preserved we would reject this assignment of error. Nothing in the record reveals that continuing contact with the mother would be beneficial to the children.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.