IN THE INTEREST OF R.N. H., D.C.H. and S.T.A.K., Minor Children, M.K., Mother, Appellant.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA
No. 7-420 / 07-0785
Filed June 13, 2007
IN THE INTEREST OF R.N.H., D.C.H. and S.T.A.K.,
Minor Children,
M.K., Mother,
Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Pottawattamie County, Kathleen A.
Kilnoski, District Associate Judge.
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to three
children. AFFIRMED.
William F. McGinn of McGinn, McGinn, Jennings & Springer, Council
Bluffs, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant
Attorney General, Matthew Wilber, County Attorney, and Dawn Eimers, Assistant
County Attorney, for appellee State.
Lori Falk-Goss and Brian Rhoten, Council Bluffs, for appellee fathers.
Marti D. Nerenstone, Council Bluffs, guardian ad litem for the minor
children.
Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Eisenhauer and Baker, JJ.
2
BAKER, J.
Melissa appeals from the order terminating her parental rights to Raven,
who was born in 1998, Dameon, who was born in 1996, and Slade, who was
born in 1994. Although she had minimal contact with the children throughout this
case, rarely attended court hearings, failed to complete recommended drug or
mental health treatment, and did not attend or present evidence at the
termination hearing, Melissa maintains on appeal that “[t]his case involve[s] an
issue of the parent child relationship suffering as a result of a procedural rule.”
She does not indicate what “procedural rule” served to improperly influence the
court’s decision, and because we conclude termination is decidedly in the
children’s best interests, we affirm the termination of Melissa’s parental rights.
All three children were removed from Melissa’s custody in April of 2005,
when police discovered a drug pipe in the family’s residence, which had been
deemed unfit for habitation by Council Bluffs housing inspectors.
Melissa
admitted she and two friends had used methamphetamine in the house the
previous day. Based on this incident, the children were adjudicated to be in need
of assistance pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and (g) (2005).
Following their removal, the children remained in foster care until the State filed a
petition to terminate Melissa’s parental rights in March of 2007. Following a
hearing, the court terminated Melissa’s parental rights to all three children under
sections 232.116(1)(d), (e), (f), and (i).
Upon our de novo review of the record, see In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821,
824 (Iowa 1991), we affirm the court’s ruling that clear and convincing evidence
supports termination under the provisions cited. Contrary to Melissa’s urgings on
3
appeal, it would not have been appropriate to grant her “additional time to work
for reunification,” for it appears no amount of additional time would have
convinced Melissa of the necessity to make the children a priority in her life,
address her troubling personal issues, and take seriously her role as a mother.
See In re A.C., 415 N.W.2d 609, 613 (Iowa 1990) (“The crucial days of childhood
cannot be suspended while parents experiment with ways to face up to their own
problems.”). Further, Melissa failed to seek additional services, failed to appear
at the termination hearing and has provided us with no record upon which we
could conceivably determine that additional time would be of any benefit. This
issue has been waived. See In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
By the time of the termination hearing, the children had been out of
Melissa’s custody for approximately two years with no trial period in her home.
She has had limited contact with the children and even at the visits with the
children that she did attend, Melissa did not make the children a priority. During
one visit, Melissa brought along a friend that the children reported had used
methamphetamine with their mother. She failed to comply with or complete the
majority of services offered to her, including substance abuse treatment and
individual and family therapy. It is clear that the children cannot be returned to
the custody of their mother.
The children have been together in the same foster home for two years.
They are thriving in that foster home and expect to be adopted by those foster
parents. The mother has been given adequate time to seek reunification. Given
Melissa’s current unsettled situation and indifferent attitude, coupled with the
4
children’s flourishing and optimistic status in their foster home, we agree that
termination of Melissa’s parental rights is in their 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.