IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 17-1682
Filed January 10, 2018
IN THE INTEREST OF I.W.,
Minor Child,
H.R., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, Cheryl Traum,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights. AFFIRMED.
Jean Capdevila, Davenport, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee State.
Jennifer M. Olsen of Olsen Law Office, Davenport, guardian ad litem and
attorney for the child.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Tabor and Bower, JJ.
2
BOWER, Judge.
A mother appeals the order terminating her parental rights.1 We find the
State made reasonable efforts and termination is in the child’s best interests. We
affirm the juvenile court.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
I.W. was born in January 2013. The child was voluntarily placed in foster
care in May 2015 following concerns of improper supervision, and a consent
order was filed placing I.W. in the custody of the Iowa Department of Human
Services (DHS) on September 2, 2015. I.W. was then adjudicated a child in
need of assistance, in October 2015.
After the adjudication of I.W., the mother participated in services including
parenting education, supervised visitation, foster care services, substance-abuse
evaluations and treatments, domestic violence education, and budgeting
education. The mother made enough progress that I.W. was returned to her care
on a trial basis. However, this only lasted for a short period of time. The mother
began to attend services sporadically and eventually withdrew from services in
April 2017. The mother later declined some visits with I.W. and even when
present would only occasionally interact with the child.
The juvenile court also found the mother had untreated mental-health
issues. The mother had not completed a mental-health evaluation more than six
months after funds were made available to her. The mother had previously
received treatment but was discharged for not participating. She had also
threatened self-harm. In May 2017, she informed a DHS worker she was taking
1
The father appealed separately, but his appeal was found to be untimely.
3
an emergency flight to California for inpatient treatment, but after failing to
complete treatment she informed the worker she was released for medical
reasons. The mother did not sign releases or provide proof of treatment for any
treatment.
Additionally, the mother’s home was unclean and had animal waste
throughout. The mother had relationships with partners who were unsuitable to
be around I.W. She was moving toward unsupervised visits but allowed her
boyfriend to move into her home, even though he had significant and
unaddressed mental-health issues. The mother participated in substance-abuse
programs but did not provide a release allowing the juvenile court to consider the
documents. There is also concern the mother is improperly using her
prescription medications.
A hearing was held September 12, 2017, and the juvenile court terminated
the mother’s parental rights October 7, pursuant to Iowa Code section
232.116(1)(b), (d-f), (i), (k), and (l) (2017). The mother now appeals.
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 child. In re L.L.,
459 N.W.2d 489, 493 (Iowa 1990).
4
III. Reasonable Efforts
The mother first claims DHS did not make reasonable efforts to reunify her
with I.W. The State claims the mother did not properly preserve this issue. The
mother claims she had a “personality conflict” with her DHS service provider.
She requested DHS change the service provider in order to allow her to more
fully participate in services and visitation. DHS did not approve the change. The
mother brought this issue to the juvenile court’s attention only at the termination
hearing. Generally, an issue must be raised before the court and ruled on before
it is preserved for appellate review. In re R.J., 495 N.W.2d 114, 117 (Iowa Ct.
App. 1992) (citation omitted). We find the mother did not properly preserve the
issue for appellate review.
IV. Best Interests
The mother also claims termination is not in the child’s best interests. I.W.
is currently with a foster family that intends to adopt him if parental rights are
terminated. The juvenile court stated I.W. is doing well in the foster home,
receives therapy on a regular basis, has his daily needs met, and is deeply
bonded with the foster family. The mother’s history of instability and an inability
to care for herself and the child indicate termination is in the best interests of
I.W., as past behavior is the best indication of future performance. See In re C.K.,
558 N.W.2d 170, 172 (Iowa 1997).
AFFIRMED.