IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 16-1197
Filed September 14, 2016
IN THE INTEREST OF J.H., J.H., & N.H.
Minor Children,
T.H., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Susan F. Flaherty,
Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights.
AFFIRMED.
Zachary D. Crowdes of Crowdes Law Office, Cedar Rapids, for appellant
mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kathrine S. Miller-Todd and
Janet L. Hoffman, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee State.
Kimberly A. Opatz of the Linn County Advocate, Cedar Rapids, for minor
children.
Considered by Danilson, C.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ.
2
BOWER, Judge.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights. We find
there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support termination of the
mother’s rights, termination is in the children’s best interests, and none of the
exceptions to termination should be applied in this case. The mother has not
preserved error on the issue of reasonable efforts, but even if the issue were
preserved, the State made reasonable efforts in this case. We affirm the
decision of the juvenile court.
I. Background Facts & Proceedings
T.H., mother, and I.H., father, are the parents of three children, born in
2011, 2012, and 2014. The Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) became
involved with the family after the birth of the youngest child, when hospital
personnel became concerned about the mother’s mental condition. The mother
has a history of mental illness. The father has a history of substance abuse.
There is also a history of domestic violence between the parents. The children
were removed from the parents’ care on July 9, 2014, because the mother had
chased the father through the house with a knife, in the presence of the children.
The children were adjudicated to be in need of assistance pursuant to
Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(a), (b), (c), and (n) (2013). Eventually, the parents
separated and the father moved to Illinois. The mother progressed with services,
and on November 20, 2015, the juvenile court determined she could begin
overnight visitation. On December 25, 2015, during an overnight visit, the mother
had an anxiety attack and returned the children to foster care early. She had no
further overnight visits.
3
The State filed a petition for termination of parental rights. The juvenile
court entered an order on February 11, 2016, granting the mother more time to
work towards reunification. The mother was given multiple services to support
her efforts to regain custody of the children.
On March 3, 2016, the mother attempted suicide by taking an overdose of
prescription medication. The children were in the home at the time. In addition,
a drug test of the mother was positive for marijuana. The mother stated she had
been using marijuana for several months in an attempt to control seizures. Also,
the children reported the father, who had not addressed his substance abuse or
domestic violence problems, had visited the home for a few days.
The juvenile court entered an order on July 1, 2016, terminating the
mother’s parental rights pursuant to section 232.116(1)(f) (two older children) and
(h) (youngest child) (2015).1 The court found:
[The mother’s] mental health continues to interfere with her ability
to provide full-time care and supervision to her children. [The
mother’s] unhealthy relationship with [the father] contributes to her
difficulties in establishing that she could safely resume care of her
children. Her use of illegal substances also contributes to her
difficulties in establishing that she could safely resume care of the
children. She has continued to have difficulty providing adequate
care and supervision for all three children for extended periods of
time.
The court concluded it was in the children’s best interests to terminate the
mother’s parental rights. The court found none of the exceptions set out in
section 232.116(3) applied in this case. The mother appeals.
1
The father's parental rights were also terminated. He has not appealed the juvenile
court decision.
4
II. Standard of Review
The scope of review in termination cases is de novo. In re D.W., 791
N.W.2d 703, 706 (Iowa 2010). Clear and convincing evidence is needed to
establish the grounds for termination. In re J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 798 (Iowa
2006). Where there is clear and convincing evidence, there is no serious or
substantial doubt about the correctness of the conclusion drawn from the
evidence. In re D.D., 653 N.W.2d 359, 361 (Iowa 2002). The paramount
concern in termination proceedings is the best interests of the children. In re
L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489, 493 (Iowa 1990).
III. Discussion
A. The mother claims there is not sufficient evidence in the record to
support termination of her parental rights. In particular, she claims the evidence
fails to show the children could not be safely returned to her care. She states
some of the concerns leading to the removal of the children have been
ameliorated, such as the father’s substance abuse and the domestic violence
between the parents. The mother states she is addressing her mental health
problems.
We conclude there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to
support a finding the children could not be safely returned to the mother’s care.
Due to the mother’s mental health problems, she is unable to care for the
children over an extended period of time. Even with safety precautions in place,
she attempted to commit suicide during a time the children were in the home.
We determine the juvenile court properly terminated her parental rights under
section 232.116(1)(f) and (h).
5
B. The mother claims the State did not engage in reasonable efforts
towards reunification. She states social workers caused missed visits, which
acted as a barrier to her progress in the case. The State claims the mother did
not preserve error on this issue.
While the State has an obligation to make reasonable efforts, it is a
parent’s responsibility to demand services prior to the termination hearing if they
had not been offered. In re H.L.B.R., 567 N.W.2d 675, 679 (Iowa Ct. App. 1997).
It is too late to challenge a service plan at the termination hearing. In re M.B.,
595 N.W.2d 815, 818 (Iowa Ct. App. 1999). The mother did not raise her
concerns concerning the reunification efforts prior to the termination hearing.
Even if the mother’s claims were timely, however, the record shows the State
made reasonable efforts to reunite the mother with her children.
C. The mother claims termination is not in the children’s best interests
and the juvenile court should have decided not to terminate her parental rights
based on the closeness of the parent-child relationship. The juvenile court may
decide not to terminate a parent’s rights if the court finds, “There is clear and
convincing evidence that the termination would be detrimental to the child at the
time due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.” Iowa Code
§ 232.116(3)(c); In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33, 41 (Iowa 2010).
The juvenile court found the children’s “need for permanency, security,
safety, physical and intellectual health dictate that it is in their best interest to
have parental rights terminated.” The court also found, “none of the exceptions
to termination as set out in section 232.116(3) applied to these proceedings.”
6
We agree with the juvenile court’s conclusions. The mother is not able to provide
the permanency and security the children need.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
AFFIRMED.