Opinion
No. 2-1057 / 02-1900
Filed January 15, 2003
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Mahaska County, Michael R. Stewart, Judge.
Father appeals the order terminating his parental rights to his daughter. AFFIRMED.
Jeffrey Garland of Brierly Charnetski L.L.P., Grinnell, for appellant father.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Charles A. Stream, County Attorney, and Richard Scott, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.
Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Miller and Eisenhauer, JJ.
Michael Fisher, Oskaloosa, guardian ad litem for minor child.
Clayton R. is the father of Hannah R., who was born on November 27, 2001. On November 29, Hannah was removed from the home of her mother, Jessica O., when Hannah tested positive for marijuana at birth and the Department of Human Services learned Clayton was a convicted sex offender. After a short return to her mother's care, Hannah was again removed on March 6, 2002, and placed in foster care. On April 18, 2002, Hannah was adjudicated in need of assistance (CINA) pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.2(6)(n) (2001).
We note the record contains references to at least three different birth dates for Hannah.
On August 5, 2002, the State filed a petition seeking to terminate Clayton's parental rights to Hannah. Following a trial, the juvenile court terminated his parental rights under section 232.116(1)(h) (Supp. 2001). Clayton appeals from this order.
We review termination of parental rights orders de novo. In re R.F., 471 N.W.2d 821, 824 (Iowa 1991). Our primary concern is the best interests of the child . In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000).
Clayton first contends Hannah had not been out of his custody for the requisite period of time. See Iowa Code section 232.116(1)()(3) (requiring the child to have been removed from the parent's custody for at least six of the last twelve months, or for the last six consecutive months). In that Hannah's last removal occurred on March 6, 2002, the trial on this matter occurred on October 23, 2002, and there were no trial home placements, we find this element unquestionably met.
Clayton also asserts the State failed to provide services aimed at reuniting the family. Before parental rights may be terminated, the State must make reasonable efforts to reunite a family by providing reasonable services in an attempt to eliminate the need for removal. In re E.K., 568 N.W.2d 829, 831 (Iowa Ct.App. 1997).
What efforts the State must make to reunite a family are dependent on the circumstances of the family. See In re S.J., 620 N.W.2d 522, 525 (Iowa Ct.App. 2000) (noting the services required to be supplied an incarcerated parent are only those that are reasonable under the circumstances). Here, Clayton had a substantial criminal background including a guilty plea to lascivious acts with a child, for which he is listed on the Iowa Sex Offender Registry and deemed a "high" risk. At the time of trial, he was incarcerated on a conviction for possession with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Clayton also testified that the earliest he could hope to resume Hannah's care was in a year following his possibility of parole within six months and a subsequent six months in a halfway house.
Prior to his incarceration in May of 2002, the DHS had allowed supervised visitation between Clayton and Hannah, and he was asked several times to submit to a urinalysis, which he always refused. While in prison he was undergoing drug treatment; however, Clayton never undertook a sex offender treatment program, did not undergo a substance abuse evaluation because he "did not get to it in time," and never inquired of prison officials whether he could take parenting classes. Also, Clayton submitted to a psychological evaluation which was completed in June.
We conclude the services offered were reasonable under the circumstances. See id. Hannah deserves permanency and cannot endlessly await Clayton's maturity. See In re T.D.C., 336 N.W.2d 738, 744 (Iowa 1983). We therefore affirm the termination.