In the Interest of B.H., Minor Child
B.H., Father-Appellant
Attorney for Appellant Father
Danielle M. Ellingson
Attorney for Appellee State
Tamara Knight, Assistant Attorney General
Guardian ad Litem
Carrie J. Rodriguez
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Floyd County, Karen Kaufman Salic, Judge. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Chicchelly and Buller, JJ. Opinion by Chicchelly, J. (11 pages)
A father appeals the adjudicatory and dispositional orders in a child-in-need-of-assistance proceeding (CINA). OPINION HOLDS: Clear and convincing evidence supports each of the grounds for the CINA adjudication and the child’s removal from the father’s custody. Because restricting supervised visitation will eliminate the risk of adjudicatory harm to the child while maintaining the parent-child bond and serving the child’s best interests, we reverse the portion of the dispositional order prohibiting contact between the father and child. We remand to the juvenile court to order supervised visitation at the department of health and human service’s discretion.
