In the Interest of B.H., Minor Child
B.H., Father-Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
State of Iowa, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
Attorney for Appellant Father
Danielle M. Ellingson
Attorney for Appellee State
Michelle R. Becker, Assistant Attorney General
Guardian ad Litem
Elizabeth Wayne
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 AND REVERSED IN PART ON APPEAL; REVERSED ON CROSS-APPEAL. Considered without oral argument by Tabor, C.J., and Ahlers and Langholz, JJ. Opinion by Langholz, J. (10 pages)
A father appeals and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services cross-appeals the juvenile court’s dispositional review order. Both challenge the juvenile court’s denial of their requests for supervised visitation in a therapeutic setting. And the father challenges the order for a new psychosexual evaluation, contending that the court erroneously denied his request that it be completed by a different evaluator than the first evaluation. OPINION HOLDS: We reverse the visitation restriction. Given the father’s progress over the past year, and with the safeguards of full supervision and a therapeutic setting, we believe the daughter can be adequately protected while allowing the case to proceed. Because the court’s order does not prohibit a new evaluator for the father’s second psychosexual evaluation, and the Department agrees that a new evaluator is appropriate, we affirm the court’s order authorizing the evaluation.
