In the Interest of R.D. and A.D., Minor Children
M.D., Father of R.D.-Appellant
N.W., Mother-Appellant
Attorney for Appellant Father
Brooke J. Thompson
Attorney for Appellant Mother
Andrea B. McGinn
Attorney for Appellee State
Diane Murphy Smith, Assistant Attorney General
Guardian ad Litem
Jami J. Hagemeier
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Kimberly Ayotte, District Associate Judge. AFFIRMED ON MOTHER’S APPEAL; REVERSED AND REMANDED ON FATHER’S APPEAL. Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Greer and Chicchelly, JJ. Opinion by Greer, J. (23 pages)
The mother of two children, R.D. and A.D., and the biological father of R.D. separately appeal the respective termination of their parental rights. Both parents challenge whether the State proved the statutory ground for termination, argue the loss of their rights is not in the best interests of their child or children, and maintain the State failed to make reasonable efforts at reunification. As part of their reasonable-efforts challenge, the mother and father challenge the constitutionality of Iowa Code section 232.102A(2) (Supp. 2022). In the alternative, the father requests additional time to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights to both children and find she lacks standing to make her constitutional challenge. As to the father, we conclude the department failed to meet its reasonable-efforts obligation and reverse the termination of his rights to R.D., grant his request to delay permanency for six months, and remand. Because we resolve the issue on statutory grounds, we do not reach the father’s constitutional arguments.
