D.W., Father, Appellant. v. << (2021)

Court of Appeals of Iowa.2021-08-04No. No. 21-0743

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court affirmed the termination of the father's parental rights, finding that termination was in the children's best interests based on their stronger bond with the foster parent, the foster parent's willingness and readiness to adopt, and the necessity of securing permanency for the children.

A father challenged the termination of his parental rights to his two children on the grounds that doing so was not in their best interests, citing the bond between himself and the children. The court focused its review on this best-interest determination, the only aspect the father contested on appeal. The court found that while the father claimed a close relationship with the children, the social worker had characterized their bond as minimal. In contrast, the children had developed a strong attachment to their foster parent, whom they called "mom," and the foster parent was prepared and willing to adopt them.

The court emphasized that once the state has established grounds for termination, children cannot be denied permanency based on hopes that a parent might eventually become capable of providing a stable home. Given the children's established bond with the foster parent, her readiness to adopt, and caseworkers' confidence in her ability to meet the children's developmental needs, the court determined that termination served the children's best interests by securing their permanency and stability.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether termination of parental rights serves the child's best interests
Strength and significance of parent-child bond in best-interest analysis
Child's bond with and placement stability with foster parent
Permanency rights of children after grounds for termination are established

Procedural posture

The father appealed the juvenile court's termination of his parental rights, limiting his challenge to the court's best-interest determination.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his children, D.W. and N.W. We affirm.

We review termination proceedings de novo. In re Z.P., 948 N.W.2d 518, 522 (Iowa 2020). We generally use a three-step analysis to review the termination of a parents rights. In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467, 472 (Iowa 2018). Those steps include: (1) whether grounds for termination have been established, (2) whether termination is in the childrens best interests, and (3) whether we should exercise any of the permissive exceptions to termination. Id. at 472–73. “However, if a parent does not challenge a step in our analysis, we need not address it.” In re J.P., No. 19-1633, 2020 WL 110425, at *1 (Iowa Ct. App. Jan. 9, 2020).

The father only appeals the juvenile courts best-interest determination, so we limit our review to that step. When making a best-interest determination, we “give primary consideration to the child[ren]’s safety, to the best placement for furthering the long-term nurturing and growth of the child[ren], and to the physical, mental, and emotional condition and needs of the child.” In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33, 40 (Iowa 2010) (quoting Iowa Code § 232.116(2) (2009)). “It is well-settled law that we cannot deprive a child of permanency after the State has proved a ground for termination under section 232.116(1) by hoping someday a parent will learn to be a parent and be able to provide a stable home for the child.” Id. at 41.

The father argues termination is not in the childrens best interest due to their close bond with him. We disagree. The social worker assigned to this family described the bond between the father and children as “minimal.” Conversely, the children are bonded to the foster parent and fully incorporated into her family. See Iowa Code § 232.116(2)(b) (2020). They refer to her as “mom.” The foster parent is interested in adopting the children and has completed adoption classes. And caseworkers believe the foster parent will be able to meet the childrens developmental needs in the future. Termination is the next logical step toward the permanency these children need and deserve. It is in their best interests.

We affirm without further opinion. Iowa Ct. R. 21.26(1)(a), (d), (e).

AFFIRMED.

MAY, Judge.