Opinion
No. 2-1058 / 02-1956
Filed January 15, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Greg Brandt, District Associate Judge.
Father appeals an order terminating his parental rights to one child. AFFIRMED.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, John Sarcone, Attorney General, and Jon Anderson, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Edward Bull, Des Moines, for appellant father.
Amy Kepes, Des Moines, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Karen Taylor, Des Moines, for mother.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Miller and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Perry and Shauntel are the parents of Toni, who became six years of age in early October 2002. Shauntel is also the mother, by another father, of three-year-old Arion. On June 4, 2001, the juvenile court adjudicated the two children to be in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and 232.2(6)(n) (Supp. 2001).
On June 7, 2002, the State filed a petition to terminate the parental rights of the two children's parents. Following a trial the juvenile court terminated Perry's parental rights to Toni pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(b) (abandonment), (e) (child adjudicated CINA, removed from home for at least six consecutive months, parent has not maintained significant and meaningful contact with the child), and (f) (child four or older, adjudicated CINA, removed from home for twelve of last eighteen months, cannot be returned home at the present time) (Supp. 2001). It also terminated Shauntel's parental rights to Toni and Arion, and terminated the parental rights of Arion's father. Perry appeals the termination of his parental rights to Toni.
We review termination proceedings de novo. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). Our primary interest is the best interests of the child. Id.
Perry claims the State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that his parental rights should be terminated, stating as supporting authority Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(d) (2001). The juvenile court did rely in part on that statute's successor, Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) (Supp. 2001). However, the juvenile court also found grounds for termination had been proven under two other statutory provisions, including section 232.116(1)(f) (Supp. 2001). For the reasons that follow, we find the grounds for termination under section 232.116(1)(f) were proven by clear and convincing evidence.
Essentially uncontroverted evidence presented at the termination hearing shows the following facts. Toni was born in October 1996, and was thus four or older at the time of the August and September 2002 termination hearing and November 2002 termination order. She was adjudicated a CINA on June 4, 2001. She was last removed from parental custody April 6, 2001, and had thus been removed for substantially more than twelve of the last eighteen months. Toni could not be "returned" to Perry at the present time, as he was serving a sentence in federal prison which began April 18, 1998, the first possible date he could be released back into the community was about December 2003, some fifteen months after the termination hearing and more than a year after the termination order, and facts set forth later in this opinion show there is essentially no meaningful parent-child relationship between him and Toni.
Having found clear and convincing evidence supports grounds for termination under section 232.116(1)(f) (Supp. 2001), we need not address the remaining statutory grounds relied on by the juvenile court. See In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 911 (Iowa Ct.App. 1996) (holding that where the district court terminates parental rights on more than one statutory ground, we only need to find grounds to terminate under one of the statutory provisions in order to affirm).
Perry also claims termination of his parental rights was not in his daughter Toni's best interest. We disagree.
When Toni was born in October 1996 Perry was not living with her mother, Shauntel. Perry thereafter served a ten-month state term of incarceration from early April 1997, when Toni was six months old, until February 1998. In April 1998, two months after release from his state sentence, Perry began serving his present term of incarceration in federal prison, a term from which he will apparently not be released until December 2003 at the earliest. During his terms of incarceration Perry has had very little or no contact with Toni until the last three months before the termination hearing. In that three months he had about four or five telephone conversations with her. He has not seen Toni since sometime before he was arrested on the charge for which he began serving his present sentence in April 1998. He has provided no financial support for Toni while incarcerated, even though he has earned a very small amount of money from employment while imprisoned.
We must reasonably limit the time for a parent to be in a position to assume care of their child, as patience with a parent can soon translate into intolerable hardship for the child. Children simply cannot wait for responsible parenting, and Toni should not be forced to endlessly suffer the parentless limbo of foster care. Perry has had little or no relationship with Toni for all but a very few of the youngest months of her life. Toni needs and deserves permanency, which at this point in time requires termination of Perry's parental rights. We conclude the evidence clearly and convincingly shows that termination of Perry's parental rights is in Toni's best interests.
We affirm the juvenile court order terminating Perry's parental rights.