Opinion
No. 2-1054 / 02-1871
Filed January 15, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karla Fultz, Associate Juvenile Judge.
Mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights to her daughter. AFFIRMED.
Jesse Macro, Des Moines, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, County Attorney, and Martha Johnson, Assistant County Attorney for appellee State.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Miller and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Jason Howser of the Juvenile Public Defender's Office, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Jacquelyn D. is the mother of Katelyn P., who was born July 1, 1997. Katelyn first came to the attention of the Department of Human Services (DHS) in August of 2001 when Katelyn was removed after Jacquelyn and her paramour were arrested on drug charges and Jacquelyn admitted substance abuse. Katelyn was placed with family friends and she was adjudicated in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and 232.2(6)(n) (2001). Following the offer and receipt of services, on September 2, 2002, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate Jacquelyn's parental rights to Katelyn. The juvenile court later granted the petition and terminated Jacquelyn's rights under sections 232.116(1)(d) and (f) (Supp. 2001). Jacquelyn appeals from this order.
We review termination orders de novo. In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern in termination proceedings is the best interests of the children. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). While the district court terminated the parental rights on more than one statutory ground, we will affirm if at least one ground has been proved by clear and convincing evidence. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct.App. 1995).
Jacquelyn asserts the State failed to present clear and convincing evidence to support the termination under section 232.116(1)(f), and in particular that the evidence failed to show she continues to use drugs. First, it cannot be disputed that Katelyn is older than four, has been adjudicated CINA, and has been removed from Jacquelyn's home since August of 2001. Moreover, on our de novo review of the record, we agree with the juvenile court that Katelyn cannot be returned to Jacquelyn's custody. Jacquelyn has a long history of drug abuse, including such drugs as marijuana and methamphetamine, that we believe will continue to place Katelyn at risk of harm. Katelyn was first removed after her mother was arrested on drug charges. At the time of the hearing on this matter, Jacquelyn had attended at least three drug treatment programs but had yet to successfully complete any of them, having been discharged from one in January of 2002 after testing positive for methamphetamines. Jacquelyn did provide urinalyses, but only intermittently.
This provision requires clear and convincing proof the child is four years of age or older, has been adjudicated CINA, has been removed from her parents for the last twelve consecutive months, and cannot be returned to the custody of her parent.
In addition to Jacquelyn's troubling drug usage, she also shows instability in employment and housing. At the time of the trial, she had been living in an Ankeny motel for one month and had only recently secured employment at a Burger King. Furthermore, she had been living with a man with a criminal and substance abuse history. Finally, Jacquelyn made inadequate progress, was uncooperative, and otherwise showed little interest in many of the services offered to her. Under such circumstances we conclude Katelyn cannot be returned to her mother's care and that termination is in her best interests.
Having affirmed the termination under section 232.116(1)(f), we need not address the sufficiency of proof under the other ground.