In the Interest of B.C., Minor Child, A.L., Mother ( 2017 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 17-0933
Filed September 13, 2017
IN THE INTEREST OF B.C.,
Minor Child,
A.L., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Craig M.
Dreismeier, District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental
rights. AFFIRMED.
Anne M. Rohling of Rohling Law, P.L.L.C., Council Bluffs, for appellant
mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Tabitha J. Gardner, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee State.
Maura C. Goaley of Maura C. Goaley, Attorney at Law, Council Bluffs,
guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Bower, JJ.
2
BOWER, Judge.
A mother appeals the juvenile court decision terminating her parental
rights. We find there is clear and convincing evidence in the record to support
termination of the mother’s parental rights. We affirm the decision of the juvenile
court.
I. Background Facts & Proceedings
A.L. is the mother of B.C., who was born in 2016. The mother has a long
history of substance abuse, beginning at age thirteen; she is now twenty-seven
years old. Her parental rights to two older children were previously terminated.
This child was removed from the mother’s care because the child tested positive
for methamphetamine and amphetamine at the time of birth. The child was
placed in foster care.
The child was adjudicated to be in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa
Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2), (n), and (o) (2016). The mother tested positive for
methamphetamine in September 2016 and February 2017. She did not
participate in recommended treatment throughout most of the case. She did not
appear for random drug tests. The mother was evicted from her apartment and
began living with friends. She attended supervised visitation with the child.
On April 19, 2017, the State filed a petition seeking termination of the
mother’s parental rights. At the time of the termination hearing, the mother was
attending outpatient substance-abuse treatment. The juvenile court terminated
the mother’s rights pursuant to section 232.116(1)(e), (g), (h), and (l) (2017).1
1
The parental rights of the child’s putative father were also terminated. He has not
appealed.
3
The court determined termination of the mother’s parental rights was in the
child’s best interests. The mother now appeals the decision of the juvenile court.
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 conclusions 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. Sufficiency of the Evidence
The mother claims there is not sufficient evidence in the record to support
termination of her parental rights. Where the juvenile court has terminated a
parent’s rights on multiple grounds, “we need only find termination appropriate
under one of these sections to affirm.” In re J.B.L., 844 N.W.2d 703, 704 (Iowa
Ct. App. 2014).
We will address the termination of the mother’s parental rights under
section 232.116(1)(g). There was a CINA adjudication for the child on
October 21, 2016. See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(g)(1). The mother’s parental
rights to two older children were terminated—one in Iowa, one in Nebraska. See
id. § 232.116(1)(g)(2).
4
There was clear and convincing evidence the mother continued to lack the
ability or willingness to respond to services. The mother had been using
methamphetamine since she was thirteen years old. Despite several
recommendations to attend a substance-abuse treatment program, she did little
until shortly before the termination hearing, when she began to attend an
outpatient treatment program, and then was only attending about sixty percent of
the meetings. Additionally, the mother never provided the Iowa Department of
Human Services with a negative drug test. She had two positive drug tests and
did not show up for requested drug testing on thirty other occasions. The
evidence showed the mother was unwilling to take the steps necessary to
maintain sobriety so she could care for her child. See id. § 232.116(1)(g)(3).
Finally, we find there was clear and convincing evidence an additional
period of rehabilitation would not correct the situation. The mother received
services for several years during the juvenile court cases for her older children
and for this child but had not been able to overcome her drug addiction. “[I]n
considering the impact of a drug addiction, we must consider the treatment
history of the parent to gauge the likelihood the parent will be in a position to
parent the child in the foreseeable future.” In re N.F., 579 N.W.2d 338, 341 (Iowa
Ct. App. 1998). “Where the parent has been unable to rise above the addiction
and experience sustained sobriety in a noncustodial setting, and establish the
essential support system to maintain sobriety, there is little hope of success in
parenting.” Id. We agree with the juvenile court’s statement, “Additional time will
not alleviate this problem.” See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(g)(4).
5
We find the juvenile court properly terminated the mother’s parental rights
under section 232.116(1)(g) and termination of the mother’s parental rights is in
the child’s best interests. We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
AFFIRMED.