IN THE INTEREST OF B.J., Minor Child, A.R., Mother, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 6-935 / 06-1559
Filed November 30, 2006
IN THE INTEREST OF B.J., Minor Child,
A.R., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Gregory D. Brandt,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals from the termination of her parental rights to her son.
AFFIRMED.
Tracie Rickers of Kragnes, Tingle & Koenig, P.C., Des Moines, for
appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Jess Vilsack, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee.
Matthew Cunningham, Des Moines, for father.
Kathryn Miller, Juvenile Public Defender, Des Moines, guardian ad litem
for minor child.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Eisenhauer, JJ.
2
SACKETT, C.J.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to her son.
She contends the court erred (1) in not granting her motion to continue the
termination hearing; (2) in terminating her parental rights under Iowa Code
sections 232.116(1)(d), (e), and (h) (2005); and (3) in concluding termination was
in the child’s best interest. On de novo review, we affirm. See In re C.H., 652
N.W.2d 144, 147 (Iowa 2002).
The child was born in April of 2005. His parents consented to his removal
in August due to their substance abuse.
substance abuse problem.
The mother has a long-standing
At first she was compliant with treatment, but
admitted relapsing in May of 2006. In July the State petitioned to terminate the
mother’s parental rights under sections 232.116(1)(d), (e), and (h). At the start of
the hearing in September, the mother’s attorney moved for a continuance
because the mother was with her boyfriend at the time of the hearing, while he
had surgery on his finger.
The court denied the motion for continuance.
Following the hearing, which the mother did not attend, the court terminated the
mother’s parental rights under the sections pled.
A. Continuance. The mother contends the court should have granted
her motion to continue the termination hearing so she could be with her boyfriend
during his finger surgery. The juvenile court should not grant a continuance
without good cause. Iowa Ct. Rule 8.5; see In re K.A., 516 N.W.2d 35, 36-37
(Iowa Ct. App. 1994). We review the denial of a motion for continuance for an
abuse of discretion standard and will reverse only if injustice will result to the
party desiring the continuance. In re C.W., 554 N.W.2d 279, 281 (Iowa Ct. App.
3
1996). The denial must be unreasonable under the circumstances before we will
reverse. Id. Because of the urgency of termination proceedings, a court is not
obligated to grant a parent's motion for continuance because “children simply
cannot wait for responsible parenting.” In re L.L., 459 N.W.2d 489, 495 (Iowa
1990). We conclude the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion
to continue.
B.
Statutory grounds.
The juvenile court terminated the mother’s
parental rights under Iowa Code sections 232.116(1)(d), (e), and (h). When the
court terminates a parent’s rights on more than one statutory ground, we need
find termination proper under only one ground to affirm.
In re R.R.K., 544
N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct. App. 1995). The evidence convinces us the child
could not be returned to the mother at the time of the termination hearing. We
affirm the termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(h).
C. Best interest. Although raised under the rubric of best interest, the
mother claims there is a bond between her son and her that should not be
broken. See Iowa Code § 232.116(3)(c). The parent-child bond was not raised
in the termination hearing or ruled on by the juvenile court. Consequently, it was
not preserved for appeal and there is nothing for us to review.
AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
