IN THE INTEREST OF C.W., Minor Child, K.D.H., Mother, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 8-743 / 08-1274
Filed October 1, 2008
IN THE INTEREST OF C.W.,
Minor Child,
K.D.H., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Stephen C.
Clarke, Judge.
A mother appeals from the district court’s permanency order. AFFIRMED.
Michael Bandy, Waterloo, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney
General, Thomas J. Ferguson, County Attorney, and Kathleen Hahn, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee State.
Melissa Anderson-Seeber of Black Hawk Public Defender’s Office,
Waterloo, for minor child.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vogel and Eisenhauer, JJ.
2
VOGEL, J.
Kim appeals from the permanency order that transferred custody of her
son, C.W. (born in 2003), to his father pursuant to Iowa Code section
232.104(2)(d)(2) (2007).
She claims that the transfer of custody was not in
C.W.’s best interests. We affirm.
Upon our de novo review, we find that the permanency order was in
C.W.’s best interests. See In re K.C., 660 N.W.2d 29, 32 (Iowa 2003) (stating
review of a permanency order is de novo). In July 2007, the Iowa Department of
Human Services (DHS) became involved with Kim and her two children, C.W.
and K.H.1
Kim’s live-in boyfriend, who was a registered sex offender, had
sexually abused K.H. Subsequently, the children were adjudicated to be in need
of assistance pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(c)(2). Although Kim was
offered services, she did not progress such that she could safely parent C.W. At
the permanency hearing, a DHS worker testified she remained concerned
because Kim has refused to admit that K.H. had been sexually abused and has
been unable to maintain a safe home environment. Additionally, she remained
concerned about Kim’s ability to protect C.W. from abuse, especially because
C.W. has special needs.
Although DHS remained concerned about alcohol
abuse, Kim had yet to complete a substance abuse evaluation.
C.W. was last removed from his mother’s home in March 2008, and has
bonded with his father who provides him with a safe home. A recent DHS report
stated that C.W.’s father had been tending to C.W.’s academic and medical
needs. Thus, we agree with the district court that it is in C.W.’s best interests
1
The permanency order regarding K.H. is not at issue in this appeal.
3
that custody is transferred to his father. See J.E., 723 N.W.2d 793, 801 (Iowa
2006) (Cady, J., concurring specially) (stating children’s safety and their need for
a permanent home are the defining elements in determining a child’s best
interests).
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.
