Opinion
No. 2-339 / 02-0319.
Filed April 24, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Howard County, ALAN D. ALLBEE, Associate Juvenile Judge.
The parents appeal the termination of their parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Kevin E. Schoeberl, Cresco, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, M. Elise Pippin, Assistant Attorney General, and Joseph M. Haskovec, County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Mark B. Anderson, Cresco, for minor child.
Considered by VOGEL, P.J., and MAHAN and EISENHAUER, JJ.
The parents appeal the termination of their parental rights to their minor daughter pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(e) and (h) (Supp. 2001) The parents also claim that the juvenile court erred in terminating parental rights due to the exception provided in section 232.116(3). Finally, the parents claim that the Iowa statutory scheme concerning termination of parental rights is unconstitutional. We affirm.
In its order terminating parental rights, the court cites to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(e) and (h) (Supp. 2001). However, the applicable law in this termination is correctly cited as Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(f) and (i) (Supp. 2001) due to an amendment to section 232.116 that renumbered the sections but did not substantively alter them.
We review termination proceedings de novo. In re S.N., 500 N.W.2d 32, 34 (Iowa 1993). To support the termination of parental rights, the State must establish the grounds for termination under section 232.116 by clear and convincing evidence. Iowa Code § 232.116.
Section 232.116(1)(f). We conclude the evidence supports termination pursuant to section 232.116(1)(f). The parties stipulate that the first three requirements of this section have been shown. With regard to the fourth requirement, we conclude that there has been clear and convincing evidence to establish the child cannot be returned to her parents. The child has been the victim of at least three instances of sexual abuse occurring over the past nine years. The perpetrators of this abuse have included the child's brother, stepbrother, and uncle. The child's latest removal from the home of the parents occurred in October of 2000, and the foster parents reported extensive incidents of sexually acting out behavior. The family has a history of numerous moves without giving notice to the department of human services. The child has been enrolled in several different schools. A close review of the record indicates that the parents have not taken appropriate steps to protect the child from sexual abuse. The child would be at considerable risk if returned to the home of the parents. We further conclude that termination is in the child's best interests. In re M.S., 519 N.W.2d 398, 500 (Iowa 1994). When a juvenile court terminates parental rights on more than one ground, we need only find one ground exists to affirm. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995).
Section 232.116(3). The parents contend the juvenile court erred in failing to consider the exception to termination as set forth in this section. A termination, otherwise warranted, may be avoided under this exception. In re D.E.D., 476 N.W.2d 737, 738 (Iowa Ct.App. 1991). The factors under section 232.116(3) have been interpreted by the courts as being permissive, not mandatory. In re C.L.H., 500 N.W.2d 449, 454 (Iowa Ct.App. 1993). We conclude the juvenile court correctly declined to apply the exception in this case.
Constitutional Challenge. We conclude that the parents' challenge to Iowa's statutory scheme regarding termination of parental rights is without merit.
AFFIRMED.