Opinion
No. 2-755 / 02-1228
Filed October 16, 2002
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Arlen J. Van Zee, District Associate Judge.
A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Paul E. Pfeffer, Clinton, for appellants.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, Mike L. Wolf, County Attorney, and Jayme Kirsch, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
David Pillers, DeWitt, guardian ad litem for the minor children.
Considered by Hecht, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Eisenhauer, JJ.
A mother and father appeal the termination of their parental rights to their two children pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (Supp. 2001). They contend the district court erred in finding the children could not be returned to their parents' care. We review their claim de novo. See In re M.T., 613 N.W.2d 690, 691 (Iowa Ct.App. 2000).
In its order terminating parental rights, the court cites to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) (2001). However, the applicable law in this termination is correctly cited as Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) (Supp. 2001) due to an amendment to section 232.116 that renumbered the sections but did not substantively alter them.
In order to terminate parental rights under section 232.116(1)(f), the State is required to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the children are four years of age or older, have been adjudicated in need of assistance, and have been removed from the home for twelve of the last eighteen months. The parents do not dispute the State has met this burden. However, they contend it did not prove the fourth element of section 232.116(1)(f), that the children cannot be returned to them as provided in section 232.102, because the case plan did not include their extended family. They contend they could have corrected their deficiencies with assistance from their extended family.
A challenge to the sufficiency of services should be raised in the course of the child in need of assistance proceedings. In re L.M.W., 518 N.W.2d 804, 807 (Iowa Ct.App. 1994). The parents never challenged their case plan and have thereby failed to preserve error for our review. However, from our review of the record we conclude assistance from the extended family would not have made a difference. Although every effort was made to assist the parents, they simply refused to modify their behavior. 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 child rise above the rights and needs of the parent. In re J.L.W., 570 N.W.2d 778, 781 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997).