Opinion
No. 4-795 / 04-1659
Filed December 8, 2004
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Patrick Parry, of Forker and Parry, Sioux City, for appellant-father.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas S. Mullin, County Attorney, and Cindy Weber-Blair, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee.
Angie Schneiderman, of Berenstein, Moore, Berenstein, Heffernan Moeller, L.L.P., Sioux City, for the mother.
Joseph Kertels of the Juvenile Law Center, Sioux City, guardian ad litem for the children.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Zimmer and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
Michael is the father of Zoe (D.O.B. 6/13/01) and Addison (D.O.B. 1/24/99). The juvenile court terminated his parental rights to these children on five statutory grounds. On appeal, Michael contends the State failed to prove any of these grounds. He also argues termination is not in the children's best interests.
Reviewing the record de novo, we find clear and convincing evidence to support termination under Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(h) and (l) (2003) (requiring proof of certain uncontested elements and proof that the children cannot be returned to parent's custody); In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 64 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999) (stating we may affirm if there is evidence to support any ground cited by the juvenile court).
The children were removed from Michael's care in September 2003, after Michael's mother discovered him asleep in the basement with a white powdery substance next to him. In addition, an open lockbox containing a canister of marijuana was found in easy reach of Zoe, who was two at the time. Michael admitted to possessing methamphetamine and marijuana. He was arrested and charged with possession of these drugs, but was soon released.
Michael briefly exercised supervised visitation with his daughters. By November 2003, he was again suspected of using drugs. The same month, officers arrested him for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. Supervised visitation was permanently suspended. Michael pled guilty to the methamphetamine charge.
At the time of the termination hearing, Michael was serving a ten-year prison sentence. He anticipated a release date no sooner than July, 2005 and he stated it would take approximately six months from that point to get ready to assume the care of his daughters. Given this evidence, the statutory elements of Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(h) and (l) were satisfied.
We also find termination was in the children's best interests. See In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000). Michael had a long history of abusing drugs. He began consuming alcohol at the age of nine, marijuana when he was fifteen, and methamphetamine at the age of twenty-three. When he was thirty-seven years old, he admitted he was still "monkeying" with marijuana and methamphetamine, despite having been given sole custody of the children by an Illinois court. Social workers opined that he had "not changed [his] lifestyle to accommodate raising [his] children."
The effect of Michael's conduct on his older daughter Addison was pronounced. She displayed significant behavioral problems in daycare and in foster care and began undergoing rigorous therapy. Regardless of Michael's incarceration he was ill-equipped to address these problems; as psychological testing revealed he had poor parenting skills.
We recognize Addison was "very loyal to her birth parents." We also recognize Michael loved both his children and expressed remorse for his actions. However, his expressions of remorse simply came too late.
As the juvenile court stated,
The Illinois court and this court gave Michael an incredible opportunity to parent his children and he wasted it. These children should not have to wait any longer for their father to make them a priority in his life, since he has not done so thus far.
We agree with the district court that termination of Michael's parental rights to Addison and Zoe was in their best interests.