IN THE INTEREST OF D.L.R. and M.R., Minor Children, M.A.R., Father, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 8-854 / 08-1426
Filed October 15, 2008
IN THE INTEREST OF D.L.R. and M.R.,
Minor Children,
M.A.R., Father,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Louise Jacobs,
District Associate Judge.
A father appeals from the order terminating his parental rights.
AFFIRMED.
Robb Goedicke of Burdette Law Firm, P.C., Clive, for appellant father.
Edward Bull of Bull Law Office, P.C., Des Moines, for mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Chris Gonzales,
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.
Charles Fuson of the Youth Law Center, Des Moines, for minor child.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ.
2
HUITINK, P.J.
M.R. (father) appeals from the trial court’s termination of his parental rights
concerning his children, M.R. and D.R.
He asserts the evidence does not
support termination of his parental rights on any grounds citied by the trial court.
We review his claims de novo. In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
The father’s parental rights were terminated pursuant to Iowa Code
sections 232.116(1)(b) (2007) (abandonment), (d) (child CINA for physical or
sexual abuse (or neglect), circumstances continued despite receipt of services),
(e) (child CINA, child removed for six months, parent has not maintained
significant and meaningful contact with the child), (g) (child CINA, parental rights
of another child terminated, parent does not respond to services), (h) (child is
three or younger, child CINA, removed from home for six of last twelve months,
and child cannot be returned home), and (l) (child CINA, parent has substance
abuse problem, child cannot be returned within a reasonable time).
If the
juvenile court terminates parental rights on more than one statutory ground, we
need only find that the evidence supports termination on one of the grounds cited
by the juvenile court to affirm. In re R.K., 649 N.W.2d 18, 19 (Iowa Ct. App.
2000).
In order to terminate parental rights under Iowa Code section
232.116(1)(g), we must find: (1) the child has been adjudicated a child in need of
assistance, (2) the court has terminated parental rights with respect to another
child who is a member of the same family, (3) there is clear and convincing
evidence that the parent continues to lack the ability or willingness to respond to
services which would correct the situation, and (4) there is clear and convincing
3
evidence that an additional period of rehabilitation would not correct the situation.
The first two statutory elements are not in dispute. The trial court’s findings of
fact concerning elements three and four state:
[M.R.] is unable at this time to have the children returned to his
home, and it is not simply a matter of his incarceration. Prior to his
incarceration, he did not show an ongoing commitment to making
the changes necessary for the children to be returned to his care. It
is unlikely that the children could be returned to his care in the
foreseeable future. He is unable to provide a safe and stable home
for his children.
....
He has neither made significant inquiries concerning the child, nor
has he attempted to participate in any of the services being offered.
Though [M.R.] testified that participating in programs while in prison
which may be helpful to him, the participation in those services
does not cause him to be able to care for the children at this time.
Based on our de novo review of the record, we find abundant evidence
supporting these findings, and we adopt them as our own. Like the trial court, we
find clear and convincing evidence supports the termination of the father’s
parental rights pursuant to section 232.116.1(g).
The father also argues that termination is not in the best interest of M.R. or
D.R. We disagree.
To determine what is in the best interests of the child,
evidence of the parent’s past performance is the best indicator of the quality of
future care for the child. In re J.K., 495 N.W.2d 108, 110 (Iowa 1993) (citing In re
M.M., 483 N.W.2d 812, 814 (Iowa 1992)).
Based on the father’s history of
substance abuse, criminal conduct, and incarceration, we conclude termination
of his parental rights is in the children’s best interests.
The juvenile court’s decision terminating M.R.’s parental rights with
respect to M.R. and D.R. is affirmed. We have carefully considered all of the
4
father’s remaining arguments raised on appeal and find they have no merit or are
controlled by the foregoing.
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.
