For summaries from opinions prior to August, 2018, view PDF versions here.
In the Interest of A.P., Minor Child
S.W., Mother-Appellant
Attorney for Appellant Mother
Peter Stiefel (until withdrawal)
Ray Lough
Attorney for Appellee State
Ellen Ramsey-Kacena, Assistant Attorney General
Guardian ad Litem
Deb Skelton
Court of Appeals
Court of Appeals Opinion
Opinion Number:
Date Published:
Summary
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Iowa County, Russell G. Keast, Judge. AFFIRMED. Considered by Doyle, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ. Opinion by Mullins, J. (8 pages)
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. She argues the State failed to prove grounds for termination, termination is not in the best interests of the child, and her rights should not have been terminated due to the closeness of the parent-child bond. The mother also argues she should have been given an additional six months to work toward reunification. OPINION HOLDS: We agree with the district court that the State established by clear and convincing evidence that the child could not be returned to the mother at the time of termination, establishing the only contested element of termination pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h) (2020). The mother’s history of inactivity in this case and the child’s immediate need for permanency support the district court’s decision to refuse the mother an additional six months to work toward reunification. We also agree with the district court that termination is in the child’s best interests and no permissive exception to termination applies.
