Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1446
View Summary for Case No. 23-1446
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Brent Pattison, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (9 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her two children. She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a conclusion that the children could not be returned to her custody at the time of the termination hearing, argues termination is contrary to the children’s best interests, and requests additional time to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1496
View Summary for Case No. 23-1496
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly K. Shepherd, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., Chicchelly, J., and Doyle, S.J. Opinion by Doyle, S.J. (5 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child. The mother does not challenge the statutory grounds for termination, but suggests termination is not in the child’s best interests and states that the closeness of the parent-child relationship “argues against termination.” OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence shows termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests. The mother failed to meet her burden to establish the permissive parent-child bond exception.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1511
View Summary for Case No. 23-1511
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Romonda Belcher, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (14 pages)
Intervenors appeal the juvenile court’s dispositional order in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding, which denied their motion for modification of placement of L.S. They argue the court erred in not finding the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services acted unreasonably and irresponsibly in reaching its placement decision, the department and juvenile court “impermissibly relied upon race and national origin” as factors in determining L.S.’s placement, and the court improperly adopted a permanency plan that did not exist. OPINION HOLDS: On our de novo review of the record, we find the intervenors did not meet their burden to prove that the department failed to act in the child’s best interests by unreasonably or irresponsibly failing to discharge its duties in selecting a suitable placement for the child. As a result, we affirm the juvenile court’s denial of their motion to modify placement and reject their ancillary claims.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1512
View Summary for Case No. 23-1512
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dubuque County, Thomas J. Straka, Associate Juvenile Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Schumacher, P.J., Buller, J., and Blane, S.J. Opinion by Blane, S.J. (5 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to five children, arguing she should have more time to work toward reunification and it was not in the children’s best interests to terminate her rights. OPINION HOLDS: The mother has unresolved substance-abuse, mental-health, and domestic violence issues going back to when the state first became involved with the family in 2014. We see no reason to believe the issues will be resolved in six months, so an extension is unwarranted and is not in the children’s best interests. And because of those unresolved issues, the best interests of the children require termination of the mother’s parental rights and permanent placement of the children in homes that can meet their needs. We affirm.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1537
View Summary for Case No. 23-1537
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Daniel Block, Associate Juvenile Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (10 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child. The father contends the State failed to prove statutory grounds for termination, termination does not serve the child’s best interests, a permissive exception should be granted due to the parent-child bond, a six-month extension should have been granted, and a relative guardianship should have been granted. OPINON HOLDS: Because we find the statutory grounds are satisfied, termination and the denial of a guardianship are in the best interests of the child, and no permissive exceptions or extensions apply, we affirm termination of the father’s parental rights.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1653
View Summary for Case No. 23-1653
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Eric J. Nelson, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., Buller, J., and Carr, S.J. Opinion by Carr, S.J. (9 pages)
A mother appeals the juvenile court order terminating her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: We find the termination is supported by clear and convincing evidence, the State engaged in reasonable efforts to reunify the mother and child, termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best interests, and an extension of time is not warranted. We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1688
View Summary for Case No. 23-1688
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Bower, C.J. (9 pages)
A mother appeals termination of her parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Because statutory grounds for termination exist, the termination is in the best interests of the child, and no permissive exception applies, the parental rights of the mother are terminated. The district court appropriately denied extension of time to work toward unification.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1695
View Summary for Case No. 23-1695
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lucas County, Eric I. Howe, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Ahlers, J. (8 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. She challenges the statutory grounds authorizing termination, challenges whether termination is in the children’s best interests, requests we apply a permissive exception to termination, and claims her and the children’s due process rights were violated by removal of the children from her custody. OPINION HOLDS: The children could not be safely returned to the mother’s custody, so a statutory ground authorizing termination is satisfied. Termination is in the children’s best interests. We do not apply a permissive exception to termination. The mother does not have standing to raise a claim on the children’s behalf. The mother waived her due process claim, and any challenge to removal is now moot.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1701
View Summary for Case No. 23-1701
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Clinton County, Kimberly Shepherd, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (4 pages)
The father of A.B. and N.B. appeals the order terminating his parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: The father does not challenge all grounds for termination relied on by the juvenile court, termination is in the children’s best interests, the father fails to show that termination will harm the children based on a close parent-child relationship, and delaying termination will not change the outcome. We therefore affirm.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1712
View Summary for Case No. 23-1712
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (5 pages)
The father appeals the termination of his parental rights. OPINION HOLDS: Because the father has not challenged termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2023), termination is in the child’s best interests, and the father has not demonstrated that the need for removal will not exist after a six-month extension, we affirm.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1752
View Summary for Case No. 23-1752
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Harrison County, Justin R. Wyatt, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Badding and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Badding, J. (4 pages)
A father appeals the termination of his parental rights under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (h) (2023). OPINION HOLDS: We affirm, finding the father’s petition on appeal insufficient to facilitate appellate review of most of his claims and additional time would not alleviate the need for removal.
Filed Jan 10, 2024
View Opinion No. 23-1755
View Summary for Case No. 23-1755
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Wapello County, Richelle Mahaffey, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Greer, P.J., and Ahlers and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Greer, P.J. (9 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of parental rights to her child. OPINION HOLDS: The mother waived her challenge to the reasonable efforts of the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services to facilitate reunification by not raising it prior to appeal, and we do not find that the department should offer six more months of services. We also decline to order a guardianship instead of termination and find that the mother has failed to demonstrate that the strength of her bond with the child makes termination not in the child’s best interests. We affirm.