Opinion
No. 2-375 / 01-2047.
Filed July 19, 2002.
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, SUSAN FLAHERTY, Associate Juvenile Judge.
A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. AFFIRMED.
John D. Hedgecoth of Terpstra, Epping Willett, Cedar Rapids, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant Attorney General, Denver D. Dillard, County Attorney, and Rebecca Belcher, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
John Broz, Cedar Rapids, guardian at litem for minor child.
Lucy E. Harrington, Cedar Rapids, for father.
Barbara Liesveld, Cedar Rapids, for grandmother.
Considered by VOGEL, P.J., and MILLER and VAITHESWARAN, JJ.
Regina gave birth to KeShawn in 1999. Four days after his birth, police arrested Regina and KeShawn's father on drug charges and KeShawn was removed from their home. Regina's progress toward reunification ebbed and flowed. Eventually, the juvenile court terminated her parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(g) (1999) (child cannot be returned to home). On appeal, Regina argues the State failed to prove its case and, in any event, termination was not in KeShawn's best interests. On our de novo review, we conclude otherwise.
Following KeShawn's removal, Regina cooperated fully with services designed to facilitate reunification and KeShawn was returned to her care within four months. The reunion, however, was short-lived. After two months, Regina severed contact with the Department of Human Services. When the Department regained contact with her, she had been evicted from her apartment for nonpayment of rent, was experiencing the stress of being a single parent, and was considering asking her mother to provide short-term care for KeShawn while she looked for a job.
With the approval of the Department and court, KeShawn was temporarily transferred to his grandmother's care. Before Regina could take KeShawn back, she was arrested on theft charges and spent two weeks in jail. Once released, she visited KeShawn only four times over a six-week period.
When KeShawn was a year old, Regina decided to refocus her efforts on getting him back. She asked to be placed in a community corrections program, obtained a job, exercised regular visitation with her son, underwent drug treatment and parenting training, and resolved the pending criminal charges. By the time of the termination hearing, she was to be released from the corrections facility as soon as she could find suitable housing. Service providers who worked with her at the corrections facility provided glowing reports on her behalf.
Despite this progress, the Department continued to support termination of Regina's parental rights because she had not shown she could maintain a stable, drug-free life on her own. Regina's mother, while expressing love for her daughter and grandson, also supported termination. When asked if Regina's recent improvements would change her opinion, she stated:
Well, she's been in a very structured environment and I think most anybody can live in a structured environment and do really well. I think that once she gets out on her own, it's going to be a lot more difficult. She has a limited education. She doesn't have a vehicle. She doesn't have a home at this point. Her work history is — Yeah, she's had jobs but she's had as many jobs in a couple years as I've had in my whole life, and I just feel that with all of those things that she has to overcome to live a respectable life and stay out of trouble, along with the people that she's been involved with, I don't think that she can provide the environment necessary to raise [KeShawn]."
Finally, Regina herself conceded it was unfair for KeShawn to wait for her while she gained control of her life. When asked how much additional time it would take to get reestablished in mainstream society, she responded, "I think it would take a while for me to — I can't put a time frame on it because I'm not sure. But it will take time to adjust." Given this evidence, we conclude the State satisfied its burden of proving that KeShawn could not be returned to Regina's care.
We also are persuaded that termination was in KeShawn's best interests. See Iowa Code § 232.116(2); In re Dameron, 306 N.W.2d 743, 745 (Iowa 1981). Although there is no question that Regina dearly loved her son and shared a close bond with him, he had not been in her care for most of his young life and he experienced significant upheavals in the short time that he was in her care.
For these reasons, we affirm the juvenile court's termination of Regina's parental rights.
AFFIRMED.