Opinion
No. 3-100 / 02-1873.
Filed February 28, 2003.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clay County, Donavon D. Schaefer, District Associate Judge.
Father appeals the order terminating his parental rights to his child. AFFIRMED.
Pamela Wingert, Spirit Lake, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Katherine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, and Chuck Borth, Assistant Clay County Attorney, for appellee-State.
John Greer, of Spencer, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
James H. is the father and Michelle O. is the mother of Joshua H., born August 31, 1998. Michelle has two older children by different fathers. Joshua and his two siblings were adjudicated children in need of assistance on June 2, 2000. They were removed from their mother's care on July 20, 2001 when Michelle left a drug treatment program against medical advice.
On August 2, 2002, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate Michelle's and James's parental rights to Joshua. The petition also sought termination of Michelle's parental rights to her other children. Following a trial, the court terminated James's parental rights to Joshua pursuant to section 232.116(1)(h) (Supp. 2001). The mother's parental rights to all three children were terminated. The court placed the children's custody with the Department of Human Services (DHS) for placement by adoption or other permanent placement. This appeal involves only the termination of James's parental rights to Joshua.
Formerly Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) (2001).
We review termination of parental rights orders de novo. In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child . In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
James contends the State failed to prove the grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence. In order to terminate James's parental rights under section 232.116(1)(h), the State was required to prove (1) the child was three years of age or younger, (2) he had been adjudicated a child in need of assistance, (3) he had been removed from his parent's physical custody for at least six of the last twelve months, or for the last six consecutive months, and (4) there is clear and convincing evidence he cannot be returned to his father's care at the present time.
James and Michelle were involved in a relationship for about two years. Their relationship involved drug usage. When the relationship ended, a no contact order was issued preventing James from coming to Michelle's apartment. James attended the adjudication hearing in June of 2000, but failed to attend the review hearing held in January of 2001, the modification/removal hearing held in October of 2001, and the review hearing held in December of 2001. James's visits with Joshua have been sporadic. He has had little contact with his son. James has not paid court ordered child support for Joshua since 2000. James attended an inpatient substance abuse treatment program, but left against medical advice. He failed to participate in family centered services or parental skill classes recommended by the Department of Human Services. He failed to complete a contract of expectations he was given in August of 2002. Although James has demonstrated some recent attempts to improve his situation, we conclude Joshua would suffer adjudicatory harm if placed in James's care. On our de novo review, we conclude the State has proven the statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence.
James also contends the State failed to demonstrate reasonable efforts to reunite him with his son. We conclude he has failed to preserve error on this issue. The record reveals James did not request services and he did not request additional visitation until late in the juvenile court proceedings. We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.