IN THE INTEREST OF C.R. and C.W., Minor Children, T.R.R., Mother, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 8-111 / 07-1557
Filed February 27, 2008
IN THE INTEREST OF C.R. and C.W.,
Minor Children,
T.R.R., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Louise M. Jacobs,
District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to two
children. AFFIRMED.
Francis Hurley, Des Moines, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Cory McClure,
Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Roscoe Ries of Ries Law Firm, Des Moines, for appellee father.
Kayla Stratton, Des Moines, for minor children.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Vogel and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
2
VOGEL, J.
Tasha is the mother of C.W., who was born in 2003, and C.R., who was
born in 1991. This family came to the attention of the Department of Human
Services after it was reported that Tasha had a serious alcohol problem and was
unable to properly or safely care for the children. After a fire that broke out in the
family home while Tasha was intoxicated and asleep, the State filed a petition
alleging the children to be in need of assistance (CINA). The children were
removed and placed with family members, where they remained at the time of
the termination hearing. On July 31, 2006, they were adjudicated CINA.
As Tasha’s alcohol and drug use continued and the services provided her
proved unproductive, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate Tasha’s
parental rights to the two children. Following a hearing on the petition, the court
granted the State’s request and terminated Tasha’s parental rights under Iowa
Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (l) (2007). Tasha appeals from this order.
We review termination orders de novo. In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824
(Iowa 1991). While the district court terminated the parental rights on more than
one statutory ground, we will affirm if at least one ground has been proved by
clear and convincing evidence. In re R.R.K., 544 N.W.2d 274, 276 (Iowa Ct.
App. 1995). Our primary concern in termination proceedings is the best interests
of the children. In re Dameron, 306 N.W.2d 743, 745 (Iowa 1981).
Tasha’s sole contention on appeal is that the termination of her parental
rights is not in the children’s best interests. She claims that although admittedly
she struggled with services and did have an alcohol problem, at the time of the
termination hearing she had finally “gained full acceptance of her alcohol
3
problem” and taken responsibility for communicating with service providers and
family members.
She requests additional time in order to fully rehabilitate
herself.
Upon our de novo review of the record, we conclude the juvenile court
properly found that termination was in the best interests of the children and that
an additional period of time was not warranted. First, there is no question that
Tasha has a substantial problem with alcohol and is a regular user of marijuana.
Most significantly, however, is how that drug and alcohol use has impacted her
children and placed them in dangerous situations.
C.W. and C.R. were
repeatedly placed in harm’s way as a result of Tasha’s poor judgment. See In re
J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 801 (Iowa 2006) (Cady J., concurring specially) (“A child’s
safety and the need for a permanent home are now the primary concerns when
determining a child’s best interests.”). Tasha exhibited troubling behavior in front
of not only her children, but also service providers and court personnel. In fact,
Tasha attended a court hearing on May 22, 2007, while intoxicated.
Mental
health issues provide further obstacles to reunification.
Tasha has failed to demonstrate her ability to provide a safe, drug and
alcohol free home, and emotional maturity and stability for her children despite
the services offered to her. She has not been able to stabilize her emotional and
mental health.
It is apparent that an additional period of services would be
unlikely to improve her situation, and her two children cannot wait for Tasha to
confront her own issues. They deserve a permanency she cannot provide. We
therefore affirm the termination of her parental rights.
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.
