In the Interest of K.S., Minor Child ( 2023 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 22-1765
Filed January 11, 2023
IN THE INTEREST OF K.S.,
Minor Child,
S.C., Mother
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Warren County, Kevin A. Parker,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child.
AFFIRMED.
Cathleen J. Siebrecht of Siebrecht Law Firm, Des Moines, for appellant
mother.
Brenna Bird, Attorney General, and Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee State.
Magdalena B. Reese of Juvenile Public Defender Office, Des Moines,
attorney and guardian ad litem for minor child.
Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Schumacher and Chicchelly, JJ.
2
CHICCHELLY, Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her child, born in
July 2020.1 She challenges the State’s proof of the grounds for termination and
asks for additional time to reunite with the child. After a de novo review of the
record, see In re J.H., 952 N.W.2d 157, 166 (Iowa 2020), we affirm.
The child came to the attention of the Iowa Department of Health and
Human Services (DHHS) in April 2021 when the father physically assaulted the
mother in the child’s presence. After the father tested positive for
methamphetamine that July, the parents left the state with the child. The juvenile
court issued an order to take the child into immediate custody once found.
The family was found in Kentucky, and they returned to Iowa in September
2021. Testing revealed that the child was exposed to methamphetamine, and the
juvenile court adjudicated her a child in need of assistance (CINA). At first, the
mother participated in services to address her mental-health and substance-abuse
issues. But she disengaged with services when she went to live with the father
after his December release from jail.
When several months passed without the parents making notable progress,
the State petitioned to terminate parental rights. At the termination hearing, the
mother showed signs that she was under the influence of methamphetamine.
Despite two requests, she did not provide a sample for drug testing.
The juvenile court terminated the mother’s parental rights under Iowa Code
section 232.116(1)(d) and (h) (2022). We may affirm if sufficient evidence
1The juvenile court also terminated the father’s parental rights, but he does not
appeal.
3
supports termination on one of the grounds. See In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764, 774
(Iowa 2012). The mother contests termination under section 232.116(1)(h) by
challenging the finding that the child could not be returned to her custody at the
time of the termination hearing without facing risk of harm sufficient for a CINA
adjudication. See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(h)(4); In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703, 707
(Iowa 2010).
Clear and convincing evidence shows the child could not be returned to the
mother’s custody at the time of the termination hearing. Although the mother
claims she has “shown significant progress and dedication to being sober and to
safely provide care for her child,” the record belies her claim. The mother failed to
address her substance abuse during the CINA proceedings and showed signs of
being under the influence of methamphetamine at the termination hearing.
Although the mother claims she separated from the father before the start of
termination hearing,2 the end of that relationship would not eliminate her need for
substance-abuse treatment. She has done “too little, too late.” In re C.B., 611
N.W.2d 489, 495 (Iowa 2000) (“A parent cannot wait until the eve of termination,
after the statutory time periods for reunification have expired, to begin to express
an interest in parenting.”).
The mother also asks for more time under Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(b),
which allows the court to continue the child’s placement for six months if doing so
will eliminate the need for the child’s removal. Before granting such a request, the
2When asked if she intended to be in a relationship with the father again, the
mother equivocated: “I don’t know. Could be. I don’t know. Maybe. Right now, I
don’t know. I don’t have any idea.”
4
court must “enumerate the specific factors, conditions, or expected behavioral
changes which comprise the basis for the determination that the need for removal
of the child from the child’s home will no longer exist at the end of the additional
six-month period.” Iowa Code § 232.104(2)(b).
We decline the mother’s request for more time. The mother failed to
address the reasons that led to the CINA adjudication during those proceedings,
and nothing suggests she will do so now. Because the statutory period for
termination has passed, we view these proceedings with a sense of urgency. See
C.B., 611 N.W.2d at 494–95. It is not enough to hope that the mother is now
motivated to change. See In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100, 112 (Iowa 2014) (“[W]e
cannot deprive a child of permanency after the State has proved a ground for
termination under section 232.116(1) by hoping someday a parent will learn to be
a parent and be able to provide a stable home for the child.” (citation omitted)).
Her lack of engagement during the CINA proceedings is more indicative of her
future performance than her claims at the termination hearing and on appeal. See
In re B.H.A., 938 N.W.2d 227, 233 (Iowa 2020) (noting a parent’s past performance
shows the quality of the future care that parent can provide).
Because termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the child’s best
interests, C.B., 611 N.W.2d at 492, (stating that our primary interest in termination
proceedings is the best interests of the child), we decline the mother’s request for
more time and affirm the termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h).
AFFIRMED.